Workplace accidents can have far-reaching consequences for employees and employers alike.
Ramalingam Murugan, an Indian national working as a structural steel and ship painter for Rigel Marine Services, filed a lawsuit against his employer seeking compensation for injuries he suffered in an accident that occurred in 2021, according to The Straits Times.
The accident took place when Mr. Murugan was alighting from a lorry, and he was pushed by other workers, causing him to lose his balance and fall, resulting in Murugan suffering injuries to his knee.
Breach of Duty of Care
District Judge Tan May Tee, in her judgment dated Aug 7, 2023, found that Rigel Marine Services had breached its duty of care towards Mr. Murugan.
The company’s failure to establish a safe system for workers to access the deck of the lorry contributed to the accident.
The Accident
Mr. Murugan was employed by Rigel Marine Services, a company specializing in marine vessel repairs. On the morning of Jan 3, 2021, he was being transported to his workplace along with other workers in a lorry.
Due to adverse weather conditions and time constraints, the accident occurred while he was transferring to another lorry at the company’s premises.
While trying to alight from the lorry, he was pushed by the other workers and ended up falling onto the ground after losing his balance, before being conveyed to Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, where he was found to have suffered a fracture in his knee joint, as well as an injury to his cartilage.
Murugan subsequently went through surgery and was given medical leave from 3 January to 2 June 2021.
In his lawsuit, Mr. Murugan alleged that the company had been negligent in ensuring his safety. He argued that the tailboard of the lorry was not lowered, and there was no supervisor present to oversee the safe disembarkation of workers.
The Company’s Defense
Rigel Marine Services denied the allegations and contested Mr. Murugan’s version of events. The company maintained that the tailboard was not lowered intentionally to prevent obstruction, as workers used it as a foothold to alight from the lorry.
Additionally, they argued that Mr. Murugan’s own carelessness contributed to the accident.
The Court’s Assessment
Judge Tan acknowledged inconsistencies in Mr. Murugan’s testimony and the complexities of the accident’s mechanics.
However, she affirmed that the accident did occur, likely as a result of him being inadvertently pushed amidst a crowded lorry.
The absence of witness testimony from other workers who were present during the incident was noted by the court.
Judge Tan highlighted the physical challenges involved in alighting from the lorry, given the unlowered tailboard. Workers were required to perform a potentially risky “acrobatic move” to safely disembark, which underscored the necessity of a safer process.
The court will assess the amount of compensation that Mr. Murugan is entitled to separately. This evaluation will consider factors such as medical expenses, lost wages, and the impact of the injury on his overall well-being.