The Fiji Court of Appeal has ordered Export Freight Services Limited (EFSL) to pay $50,000 as an interim payment to a freight truck driver who suffered a workplace injury while the company pursues its appeal against a High Court judgment.
In a ruling delivered on 16 June 2026, Resident Justice of Appeal Chandana Prematilaka directed EFSL to make the payment to Hemendra Nath Sharma within 21 days, together with post-judgment interest.
The Court also dismissed EFSL’s application to stay execution of the judgment pending the appeal and ordered the company to pay $2,500 in costs.
The case stems from an incident on 28 August 2014 when Sharma, a self-employed freight truck driver, was collecting cargo from EFSL’s warehouse.
While removing a loose piece of wood from his truck, his left thumb was crushed after a forklift operator lowered a pallet before ensuring Sharma was clear.
The injury resulted in a partial amputation, forcing Sharma to sell his trucking business and later work only part-time as a taxi driver with reduced earnings.
The High Court had found EFSL liable under the Occupiers’ Liability Act, common law negligence and workplace health and safety legislation.
It ruled the company failed to provide a safe loading system, adequately separate visitors from forklift operations, implement proper traffic management and ensure the forklift operator confirmed Sharma was clear before lowering the load.
EFSL appealed the decision, challenging the amount of damages awarded, including compensation for pain and suffering, loss of income and future medical expenses.
The company also argued the trial judge should have attributed greater contributory negligence to Sharma.
However, Justice Prematilaka noted the appeal did not seriously challenge the finding of liability and observed there was “no real prospect” of that finding being overturned.
The Court also pointed out that contributory negligence had not been pleaded as a defence during the High Court proceedings.
In granting the interim payment, the Court said withholding compensation would unfairly prejudice Sharma, particularly as delays in obtaining trial transcripts meant the appeal was unlikely to be heard by the Full Court in the near future.
Justice Prematilaka also refused EFSL’s application for a stay of execution, finding there was no justification to prevent Sharma from receiving part of the damages awarded while the appeal remains pending.
