Search results

March 12, 1969 Redundancy — Payment, calculation of — “Week's pay” — “Remuneration” — Car expenses — Employee receiving under contract of employment weekly sum “for expenses in connection with the use of his own motor car” — Whether remuneration — Contracts of Employment Act, 1963 (c.49), s. 4(1)(a), Sched 2, para. 3(2) — Redundancy Payments Act, 1965 (c.62), s.1(1), Sched. 1, para. 5(1).

January 29, 1969 Industrial Training — Industrial training levy — Road transport industry — Assessment — “Emoluments” of “persons employed” — Whether including sums drawn by owner and sole managing director — Company director virtual owner and sole managing director — Whether capable of being person “employed” — Industrial Training Act, 1964 (c.16), ss. 1, 4 — Industrial Training (Road Transport Board) Order, 1966, (S.I.1966 No.1112), art.2 — Industrial Training Levy (Road Transport) Order, 1967 (S.I.1967 No.1309), arts. 2(1), 3(1), (3).

March 12, 1969 Revenue — Selective employment tax — Qualifying activities — Vermin destruction — Company engaged in destruction of vermin — Employees working on farms and in other establishments — 25 per cent. of turnover from work done on farms — Whether employees engaged wholly or mainly in “ancillary activities” to farming — Selective Employment Payments Act, 1966 (c.32), s.2(1)(2X3) — Standard Industrial Classification, 001.1.

November 6, 1969 Factory — Statutory duty — Breach — Disabled workman sustaining injury while lifting weight — Told previously by employers to ask for help in lifting weights if necessary — Help readily available — Whether “employed to lift, carry or move … load so heavy as to be likely to cause injury to him” — Whether employers entitled to leave decision to ask for help to plaintiff — Safe system of work — Failure of employers to provide — Whether established — Factories Act, 1961 (9 & 10 Eliz. II, c. 34), s. 72(1).

Examines the antioxidant activities of a range of hydroxy‐substituted phenolic acids by estimating their relative abilities to scavenge the ABTS_+ radical cation generated in the aqueous phase, expressed as the Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity (TEAC value). These common food components have varying reducing abilities, dependent on the positions and extent of hydroxylation of their phenol ring. Reports the research results which suggest that some simple phenolic acids are most effective antioxidants, up to two to three times as active as vitamin C. Their relative abundance in fruits, oils, etc. indicates that they may be highly significant contributors to the overall dietary antioxidant intake. Para‐coumaric acid (4‐hydroxycinnamic acid) was found to have a TEAC value of 2.2mM (more than twice the antioxidant activity of vitamin C). Ferulic acid (3‐methoxy, 4‐hydroxycinnamic acid), the active component of oryzanol (rice bran oil) was found to have a TEAC value of 1.9 mM and gallic acid (3, 4, 5‐trihydroxybenzoic acid) a TEAC of 3.0mM (i.e. three times the antioxidant activity of vitamin C). Discusses the significance of these and other related compounds as food antioxidants and as non‐nutrient antioxidants in the diet.

June 10, 1966 Master and servant — Wrongful dismissal — Damages — Joint managing director — Offer of employment as assistant managing director at same emolument — Whether reasonable to refuse — Relevance of circumstances of dismissal — Whether attempts to find other employment reasonable.

April 10, 1967 Building — Safety regulations — Roof — Barrel roof ending in flat roof at either end — Flat roof 20 feet from ground — Workman on duckboard on barrel roof — Workman's fall from roof — Whether flat roof a “working place”— Whether flat roof or duckboard a “gangway”—Whether duckboard “adequate foothold”— Whether duckboard “safe meats of access and egress” — Building (Safety, Health and Welfare) Regulations, 1948 (S. I. 1948, No. 1145), regs. 24(1), 27(2), 31(1) — Construction (General Provisions) Regulations, 1961 (S. I. 1961 No. 1580) reg.7(1).

October 11, 1967 Negligence — Electricity — Unguarded electric wires — Electrician required to tighten wires — Mobile electric crane in course of construction — Not practice to guard wires — Whether absence of guard negligence — Electrician requiring to remove any guard to carry out work — Statutory duty — Duty to safeguard electric conductor — Fall while descending scaffolding — Whether “reasonably practicable” to guard wires — Whether employers in breach of statutory duty — Electricity Regulations, 1908 (S.R.&O. 1908, No. 1312), reg.2.

December 15, 1966 Building and construction — Safety regulations — “Machinery” Portable tool — Cutting wheel with partly uncovered flexible revolving shaft — Power derived from convenient electricity supply — Whether uncovered part of revolving shaft a “dangerous part of other machinery” — Whether duty to guard — Whether risk of accident foreseeable — Whether failure to guard negligence at common law — Construction (General Provisions) Regulations, 1961 (S.I. 1961 No. 1580), reg. 42.

In this contribution to the growing discussion of the meaning, method‐dology and rationale of the socio‐economic approach we shall not reiterate the historical development of Social Economics but will concentrate on trying to stimulate discussion of the following questions: