Justice Choo Han Teck threw out a ruling by the Commissioner of Labour - an arbiter that deals with workplace claims - who denied the family's claim, saying Ramu Ravichandran was 'on a frolic of his own' when he died.

The 35-year-old was driving a forklift when it reversed and fell into the water at a shipping terminal in Pasir Panjang on Dec 26, 2005. The body of the Indian national was found hours later.

Justice Choo's decision, released on Friday, is the second case in a month where the courts have overruled a Labour Commissioner's decision rejecting compensation claims.

It marks the latest step in a long-running battle for Mr Ramu's widow and three kids.

The Manpower Ministry (MOM) originally ordered the owners of the ill-fated forklift, Fongsoon Enterprises, to pay some $78,624 in compensation to Mr Ramu's family, who live in India.

But the firm objected, appealing to MOM's commissioner.

The company contended that Mr Ramu was not their employee and was hired by their foreman, Muhamed Meera, who was not authorised to engage workers.

They argued through their lawyer, Jispal Singh, that Mr Ramu was not asked to use the forklift on the day he died.

The company said Mr Ramu's foreman paid him out of his own pocket or with petty cash three times - proof, it said, that Mr Ramu was not an employee of the firm.

At a hearing last March, the commissioner agreed and held that Mr Ramu was on a 'frolic of his own' and not working for the company when he plunged into the sea.

His widow, R.Jaya, through lawyer A.Perumal, appealed to the High Court and Justice Choo agreed that the case should be heard as 'substantial' points of law were involved.

Explaining the grounds for reversing the decision, the judge said that although the foreman was not actually authorised to hire workers, he showed 'apparent authority' that led Mr Ramu to believe he was.

The evidence showed that Mr Meera was in charge of the day-to-day running of the firm's work and seemed like he could hire extra hands like Mr Ramu.

There was also no evidence to show that Mr Ramu knew Mr Meera was using his own money or petty cash to pay him.

The dead man was also working for another firm, Goldin Enterprises, which was engaged in lashing works at the PSA Terminal. He had approached Mr Meera for part-time work at the terminal to supplement his income and support his unemployed wife and three children.

Justice Choo said there was some evidence that the forklift was required on Dec 26, noting that Mr Ramu had told Mr Meera that a generator had to be moved that day.

The judge said the 'evidence as a whole' suggested that the forklift was meant to be used by the firm although it was unclear what its exact purpose was.