During one of the routine verifications, he discovered that one of the \u00a0pumps\u00a0 responsible for propelling the concrete was malfunctioning. Seizing the moment, he decided to take charge and began manipulating the nozzle of the machine himself, instructing his colleagues on how to pour the concrete more effectively.<\/p>\n
As he held a metal chain attached to the concrete mixer chute to guide the pouring, the pump was reactivated. Suddenly, an unexpected blockage caused the hose to jerk violently. Witness testimonies later described how the force was so great it lifted the construction manager off the ground and threw him several meters away.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
![\"He](\"https:\/\/teknomers.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/1752264775_620_The-second-hand-luxury-watch-market-was-facing-a-crisis-but.jpeg\"\/)
\n <\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div>\nOnce he regained his composure, the manager realized that his precious \u00a0Rolex Daytona\u00a0 was no longer on his wrist. It appeared that the expensive watch had sunk deep into the fast-setting concrete. Immediately, extensive searches were conducted at the site, but the watch remained elusive.<\/p>\n
Fuming over the incident, the construction manager turned his frustration towards the company and the malfunctioning equipment. He filed a lawsuit, seeking full compensation for the watch he felt he had lost due to the negligence of the company and its machinery. As reported by the Italian newspaper \u00a0Corriere di Bologna\u00a0, he stated: “You owe me my Rolex Daytona for 16,000 euros; it is your fault and the machine’s fault.”<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Common Sense from Two Courts<\/h2>\n
Italian courts were quick to deliver their verdict, ruling against the construction manager not once but twice. The responsibility ultimately lay with him for recklessly not protecting his valuable watch.<\/p>\n
After losing the initial case, the construction manager appealed to the \u00a0Court of Appeal of Bologna\u00a0, where judges reiterated the fundamental flaws in his argument. They stated, “It is seriously unsustainable that directing the trunk of a concrete mixer while wearing a \u00a016,000 euro watch\u00a0 can be considered a reasonable working practice,” according to the ruling signed by judges \u00a0Rossi, Gaudioso\u00a0, and \u00a0Mazze\u00a0.<\/p>\n
The court found that the construction manager failed to take necessary precautions and showed a lack of “expertise and diligence.” Consequently, his claims against the company were dismissed. In a further twist, not only did he lose his watch, but he was also ordered to pay an additional \u00a02,500 euros\u00a0 in legal fees. This was a painful financial lesson for the construction manager, who found out the hard way that luxury watches may not be the best companion in a construction environment.<\/p>\n
In recent years, \u00a0Rolex\u00a0 has faced challenges such as theft and counterfeiting, prompting them to consider using advanced technologies like \u00a0NFT chips\u00a0 and \u00a0blockchain\u00a0 for product authenticity. This incident serves as a bizarre but insightful reminder of the importance of workplace safety and the critical thinking required when decisions could lead to valuable losses.<\/p>\n