So you worked at a factory where you were injured (say you lost your hand) during the course of your duties and you sued your previous employer. The matter has been dragging in court for the last 3 years and you finally got a hearing date when you expect it will be concluded.
But wait … what’s this? Your Advocate summons you to his chambers and tells you that the laws of the land have changed. He explains that whereas there had been a set court procedure for handling claims such as yours, the Parliamentarians had, in their infinite wisdom, thought it wise to cut off all middle men (like lawyers and magistrates) in this cumbersome process of workmen’s compensation and create the Work Injury Benefits Act, presumably to make matters easier.
Whereas the parliamentarians had had the foresight to provide for such details as injuries between the tips of the ‘acromion’ and the ‘olcranon’, they had failed to make transitional provisions. Your lawyer explains that the Act, which came into operation in December 2007, provides that you are not entitled to sue your employer for damages arising out of your accident but should raise up the same with a certain Director of Occupational Safety and Health, who is, incidentally, yet to be appointed. He says that it matters not that your accident occurred before the law was changed since the new Act specifically provides that matters that pre-date it, such as yours, fall within its ambit.
So what to do? Your efforts at claiming your rights have lead to naught and your (previous?) Advocate is following up on his fees. You stand waiting for the position on the ground to follow the law like the proverbial cart put before the horse.
But wait … what’s this? Your Advocate summons you to his chambers and tells you that the laws of the land have changed. He explains that whereas there had been a set court procedure for handling claims such as yours, the Parliamentarians had, in their infinite wisdom, thought it wise to cut off all middle men (like lawyers and magistrates) in this cumbersome process of workmen’s compensation and create the Work Injury Benefits Act, presumably to make matters easier.
Whereas the parliamentarians had had the foresight to provide for such details as injuries between the tips of the ‘acromion’ and the ‘olcranon’, they had failed to make transitional provisions. Your lawyer explains that the Act, which came into operation in December 2007, provides that you are not entitled to sue your employer for damages arising out of your accident but should raise up the same with a certain Director of Occupational Safety and Health, who is, incidentally, yet to be appointed. He says that it matters not that your accident occurred before the law was changed since the new Act specifically provides that matters that pre-date it, such as yours, fall within its ambit.
So what to do? Your efforts at claiming your rights have lead to naught and your (previous?) Advocate is following up on his fees. You stand waiting for the position on the ground to follow the law like the proverbial cart put before the horse.
