Derek Achong
A retired janitor, who injured her back after she fell while scrubbing floors at the La Brea Police Station in 2015, has successfully sued the National Maintenance Training and Security Company Limited (MTS) for negligence.
Delivering an oral judgment at the end of a brief trial at the San Fernando High Court on Wednesday, Justice Frank Seepersad upheld Beverly George’s lawsuit against the State company.
According to the evidence in the case, she sustained the injury while performing her duties at the station on November 23, 2015.
George claimed that her supervisor Kwaisann Lewis, who usually operated a floor scrubbing machine, was feeling unwell and she volunteered to complete the task.
She claimed that while using the machine on the floor in the kitchen area, the machine’s electrical supply cord got entangled around her leg causing her to fall.
She claimed that although Lewis immediately reported the accident to her supervisor Harrichan Jankie, who was tasked with receiving reports of such incidents, he only visited the location days later.
She claimed that although she informed him that she was still suffering from back pain, Jankie did not take a report and investigate further.
She alleged that after Jankie was transferred to another district, his replacement also did not take a report.
George eventually made the report on May 24, 2016, after she visited MTS’s regional office in San Fernando.
In her lawsuit, George claimed that MTS was negligent as it failed to ensure that there was another employee present to assist in holding the cord while she operated the machine. She also claimed that MTS did not provide adequate training to use the machine as what transpired was foreseeable.
In its defence, MTS claimed that the incident never occurred as it questioned the delay in making an official report.
It also claimed that the back injury George claimed she sustained stemmed from another incident she reported in January 2018.
It also contended that George could not claim loss of earnings over her alleged inability to work after the accident as she did not take extended sick leave before she eventually retired in July 2018.
During the trial, Lewis testified on George’s behalf while Jankie testified for the company.
In his evidence, Jankie admitted that he was required to immediately visit the scene to take a report after being informed of the incident by Lewis.
“It was my duty to ensure it was safe and I was not there,” he said.
He also confirmed that two employees would usually operate the machine, which can be operated by one person if they wrap the cord around their arm.
In deciding the case, Seepersad ruled that the incident did occur as claimed by George and Lewis.
He said he was convinced by the fact that Lewis agreed to testify despite being still employed by MTS.
“It is highly unlikely that she would tell a fabrication to help a friend when she could jeopardise her own employment,” Justice Seepersad said.
He said that MTS should have recognised the risks associated with operating the machine and invested in a device to strap the cord while in operation.
He also suggested that it should have provided more training on how to safely operate the machine as the evidence suggested that George and Lewis were trained once during their over 15 years with the company.
“MTS should ensure that training is offered on an annual or bi-annual basis because people’s memory wanes with time,” he said.
While Seepersad upheld George’s case he did not assess the compensation owed to her as he referred the issue to a High Court Master.
He did advise George’s attorneys that they should hold discussions with MTS as he noted that there were some issues over linking some of the findings in her medical reports to the incident.
George was represented by Ravi Pheerangee and Anastasia Geofroy, while Michael Vialva represented MTS.
