SYNOPSIS

INTRODUCTION:
In this case the principal laid down that where the resultant of judgements and judicial
judgements are authorities and contradictories laid down for the workmens compensation
act,1925

OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY:

The objective of the study is to make clear and understand the case of Fitzsimons vs
Fordmotor Co. and also to analyze the judgment and principles laid down by the Britain
Court of Appeal.

SCOPE OF THE STUDY:

The scope of the study is a limited one and is limited to the history of the case and the related
cases will also be considered if necessary to the extent required. The cases and legislations in
which this case made an effect those will be studied.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
The researcher for this topic on analysis of the case Fitzsimmons v. Fordmotor Co,. will do a
descriptive and explanatory doctrinal study using various sources viz. Books, other research
papers and websites like Hein Online.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CASE:

The Fitzsimmons vs Fordmotor Co., decision has helped to lay the foundation for much of
the reproductive freedom currently allowed under law. Since this ruling, the Supreme Court
has cited the right to privacy in numerous Court hearings. The case brintons Ltd v Turkey
[1905] AC 230 set the precedent for the formity of usage of precedents, as determined in this
case.

CONTENTS
1. Identification
2. Facts
3. Issues
4. Holdings or decision of the court
5. Reasoning
6. Related cases
7. Conclusion
Identification:
Appellants: Fitzsimmons
Respondent: Fordmotor Co,.
Held on: 22 Feb 1946
Bench: Scott and Somervell LJJ and Vaisey J

FACTS:
Fitzsimmons (appellant was employed by the respondents Ford Motors as a rotary fettler. His
work consisted in holding, tightly gripped in the left handed machine, which was electrically
operated and vibrated 2,800 revolutions in a minute, whilst with his right hand he pressed it
against the material to be cut, using the weight of the body to increase the pressure, after
about a year the appellant found his hand going dead. On the morning of 14 march 1945, he
got a dead hand 3 times and from that time was incapacitated, totally until 18 june 1945 and
thereafter partially medical evidence was to the effect that the time appellants condition was
known as raynauds disease and that each vibration caused by the rapidly rotating instrument
was a tiny blow to the hand and arm, transmitted to the nerves, causing small damage to their
tissues, and ultimately cutting the flow of the blood needed to keep the handy in a healthy
condition. In a healthy condition. Hence filed for compensation under Workmens
Compensation Act, 1925.

ISSUES:
The question at issue was it that the injury was accounted for the injury caused at scene of
work.
Was it considered to be accountable under workmens compensation act, 1925.

JUDGMENT:
The order the lower court was not in favour of appellant and they went for an appeal. The
appeal was admissed and upheld with the decision of bringing it in favour of the appalants.

S. Visesh Gopal
Roll No: 2015111,
4th Semester.