EMPLOYEE suing employer is standard litigation in civil cases - not in reverse.

But in 1909 the London and South West Railway Company brought an action against James Trodd to recover the sum of £177 18s 4d paid as compensation to an injured workman at Southampton Docks which they claimed had been caused by his negligence.

The victim Edward Rudd had been working for the company when he was badly hurt during the unloading of cargo from the SS Bittern when a heavy sling struck him on the head and dashed him against a truck.

The company argued they had done nothing and had paid Rudd under legislation that made them liable to pay an injured party, irrespective of whether they were at fault or not.

But the law provided that if the accident had happened because of someone else's fault, that other person had to pay. And that person they claimed in this case was Trodd who was acting as the contractor in charge of the unloading with cranes.

The cargo consisting chiefly of bales of stearine, a kind of wax, and each sling contained nine bales. At one point Rudd called out, "Don't lower it as we have nowhere to put it."

But it continued and the sling struck him on the side of the head, the force of the blow slamming him into a truck and rendering him unconscious.

"The first time I saw the sling it was about three feet away from me and about seven feet in the air," the victim told the court.

Trodd, a stevedore of about 20 years standing, said he had been engaged to unload the Bitterne and employed three men to do the work.

One, Thomas Rowe, said he landed a sling of cargo on the deck and waited for the word to lower ashore from a second man called Holloway.

"But I heard no warning not to lower. The quay appeared to be clear of cargo and Rudd was near the wagon. He had plenty of time to get out of the way when I slung over the cargo that caused the accident. When I first saw Rudd, he was leaning against the wagon."

At which the judge, Mr Justice Ridley icily commented: "Waiting to be hit by the stearine, I suppose."

And under cross-examination, Rowe admitted he had not looked at the quay before sending his sling over.

The judge directed jurors that if they found for the company, they would be saying that Trodd's servants caused the accident through their negligent conduct and that he ought to pay for it and not the railway company.

"I suppose it is true to say that people engaged in these sorts of operations have to look after themselves. Yet there are rules which are to be followed, and if anyone makes a breach of those rules and did not give notice but moved his machinery too hastily so as cause an injury, I think that person should be held responsible for a breach of the rules for not taking proper care of others."

Following retirement, the jury found for the company and an order for the full amount requested was made.