Foresti v Ace Ceramics Pty Ltd [2004] NSWCA 202

Foresti v Ace Ceramics Pty Ltd [2004] NSWCA 202

The appeal failed because the evidence did not establish that water on the stairs caused the appellant's fall or that the respondent had notice or a reasonable opportunity to remove or warn of any water; nor did the evidence establish that a handrail would have prevented the appellant's injury. The Australian Standard relied on was not shown to apply to the shop-entry stairway, and the ordinary risk of slipping or tripping on such stairs was one an able-bodied person could avoid by taking reasonable care.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 June 2004
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Negligence Appeal / Appeal From the District Court of New South Wales
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['slip and Fall on Stairs' 'breach of Duty of Care' 'water on Stairs' 'absence of Handrail' 'australian Standard as 1657 1992' 'slip Resistance Requirements']
['personal Injury' 'negligence' "occupiers' Liability"] ['slip and Fall on Stairs' 'breach of Duty of Care' 'water on Stairs' 'absence of Handrail' 'australian Standard as 1657 1992' 'slip Resistance Requirements']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Negligence Appeal / Appeal From the District Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred in not finding that water on the steps caused the appellant to slip and fall.' 'Whether the respondent breached its duty of care by failing to provide a handrail on the stairway.' 'Whether reliance on Australian Standard AS 1657-1992 supported a finding of breach of duty.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the evidence did not establish that water on the stairs caused the appellant's fall or that the respondent had notice or a reasonable opportunity to remove or warn of any water; nor did the evidence establish that a handrail would have prevented the appellant's injury. The Australian Standard relied on was not shown to apply to the shop-entry stairway, and the ordinary risk of slipping or tripping on such stairs was one an able-bodied person could avoid by taking reasonable care.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed.' "Appellant to pay the respondent's costs."]