Presumption of coverage.

- O.C.G.A. §§ 34-9-7 and34-9-10 create a conclusive presumption of coverage unless otherwise specifically provided in the workers' compensation law, O.C.G.A. § 34-9-1 et seq. Fox v. Stanish, 150 Ga. App. 537, 258 S.E.2d 190, overruled on other grounds, Samuel v. Baitcher, 247 Ga. 71, 274 S.E.2d 327 (1981).

Scope of chapter.

- The provisions of the workers' compensation law (see now O.C.G.A. § 34-9-1 et seq.) prevail over all agreements not clearly in accord therewith, even in a case of an agreement between the employer and employee approved by the board, since not only the employer and employee have a real interest in the principles and policies underlying this legislation, but it is affected with the public interest. Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Welker, 75 Ga. App. 594, 44 S.E.2d 160 (1947).

Contracts releasing employer from obligations.

- This section deprived an employer of the right to make any contract to relieve oneself in whole or in part from the obligations created by the workers' compensation law (see now O.C.G.A. § 34-9-1 et seq.). Tillman v. Moody, 181 Ga. 530, 182 S.E. 906 (1935).

Employee was bound by a settlement agreement for a discrimination case that the employee signed upon advice of counsel; however, the settlement could not permit the release of the employee's workers' compensation claims pursuant to O.C.G.A. §§ 34-9-10 and34-9-15 when the settlement had not been approved by the Workers' Compensation Board. Young v. JCB Mfg., F. Supp. 2d (S.D. Ga. Aug. 25, 2008).

Right to compensation.

- Right of dependents to compensation is not subject to restriction or extinguishment by an employee during the employee's lifetime. Georgia Power & Light Co. v. Patterson, 46 Ga. App. 7, 166 S.E. 255 (1932).

Approval of agreements by board.

- When the Department of Industrial Relations (now Board of Workers' Compensation), on hearing a claim for compensation under the workers' compensation law (see now O.C.G.A. § 34-9-1 et seq.), made an award in favor of the claimant for compensation payable in a certain amount weekly during disability, the judge of the superior court, considering the case on appeal, had no authority or jurisdiction to render a judgment against the insurance carrier and in favor of the claimant for a lump sum, in full and final settlement of the claim, pursuant to an agreement of the insurance carrier and the claimant, not approved by the department. Department of Indus. Relations v. Travelers' Ins. Co., 177 Ga. 669, 170 S.E. 883, answer conformed to, 47 Ga. App. 553, 171 S.E. 169 (1933).

No agreement between an insurance carrier and a claimant, dealing with the obligation of such a carrier to pay a claimant compensation, which affects the amount of compensation, is binding until approved by the Board of Workers' Compensation. Maryland Cas. Co. v. Stephens, 76 Ga. App. 723, 47 S.E.2d 108 (1948).

Approval of final settlement receipts.

- As a matter of practice, the board does not approve final settlement receipts, nor is there any provision for such a method of disposing of a claim in the workers' compensation law (see now O.C.G.A. § 34-9-1 et seq.). GMC v. Harrison, 107 Ga. App. 667, 131 S.E.2d 234 (1963).

Release not submitted to board.

- Worker's release of an employer from various claims, which release was never submitted to or approved by the board, was void and had no effect as to any claim for benefits, regardless of whether a claim was pending or contemplated when the settlement was attempted. Caldwell v. Perry, 179 Ga. App. 682, 347 S.E.2d 286 (1986).

Agreement as to coverage by law of foreign state.

- An agreement providing that the law of Illinois would apply to the contract of employment, when Illinois did not at that time provide protection similar in principal to that provided in this state, would not be upheld by the courts of this state, nor would the court uphold such an agreement if it was intended to relate to employment wholly or in the main in this state and entirely outside of Illinois. Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Welker, 75 Ga. App. 594, 44 S.E.2d 160 (1947).

An agreement by an employee that any and all claims for injuries arising out of and in the course of employment would be governed by the workers' compensation laws of Illinois, when the employee was never located in Illinois as an employee, and when the employee's territory as an employee did not include any part of Illinois, but in the main part was located within this state, would not operate to divest the board of this state of jurisdiction to award compensation for an injury occurring in this state. Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Welker, 75 Ga. App. 594, 44 S.E.2d 160 (1947).

Cited in National Union Ins. Co. v. Mills, 99 Ga. App. 697, 109 S.E.2d 830 (1959); Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Wilson, 215 Ga. 746, 113 S.E.2d 611 (1960); Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. v. Crowder, 123 Ga. App. 469, 181 S.E.2d 530 (1971); Hayes v. Consolidated Freightways, 131 Ga. App. 77, 205 S.E.2d 40 (1974); Fountain v. Shoney's Big Boy, Inc., 168 Ga. App. 489, 309 S.E.2d 671 (1983); Southern Fried Chicken v. Thermo-King Corp., 172 Ga. App. 454, 323 S.E.2d 291 (1984); Rickets v. Tri-State Systems, 177 Ga. App. 509, 339 S.E.2d 732 (1986).

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 82 Am. Jur. 2d, Workers' Compensation, §§ 7, 34.

ALR.

- Validity of agreement by injured employee that employer shall have benefit of workmen's compensation, 96 A.L.R. 1019.

Statutory provisions regarding action against employer who does not assent to Workmen's Compensation Act as affirmative support for right of action by employee, not otherwise existing, 97 A.L.R. 1297.

Status of independent contractor as distinguished from employee for purposes of Workmen's Compensation Act as affected by intention to evade or avoid the requirements of that act, 107 A.L.R. 855.

Cancellation or attempted cancellation of insurance under Workmen's Compensation Act, 107 A.L.R. 1514.

Rights and obligations under Workmen's Compensation Act in respect of claims by employees of corporation during receivership or conservatorship of employer, 111 A.L.R. 328.

Right to compensation under Workmen's Compensation Act as affected by pension, insurance, gratuities, or other benefits not derived from the act itself, 119 A.L.R. 920.

Transfer of business as affecting common-law remedy or workmen's compensation in respect of injuries subsequently sustained by employee, 150 A.L.R. 1166.

Discharge in bankruptcy as affecting employer's liability for contributions under Workmen's Compensation Act, 161 A.L.R. 217.