Glad Retail Cleaning Pty Ltd v Alvarenga [2013] NSWCA 482

Glad Retail Cleaning Pty Ltd v Alvarenga [2013] NSWCA 482

Mirvac's payment of part of the damages award to the Plaintiff was money paid and received as damages and enlivened s 151Z(1)(b) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987, so an extension of time to appeal could cause irremediable prejudice and was refused. Glad Cleaning's appeal failed because the specific risk created by wet shoe soles contacting the moving metal travelator was not obvious to a reasonable person in the Plaintiff's position; Glad Cleaning breached its duty by not conducting the regular cleaning of the rubber tiles before the Centre opened when there was no proven Mirvac direction preventing it; the evidence supported the inference that moisture on the Plaintiff's shoes caused...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Torts Negligence Personal Injury Slip and Fall Appeal and Motion for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal / Appeal From District Court Judgment and Second Respondent's Motion for Extension of Time
Outcome
Mirvac's motion for an extension of time was dismissed and Glad Cleaning's appeal was dismissed.
Legal Topics
['slip and Fall on Travelator' 'obvious Risk Under Civil Liability Act 2002' 'breach of Duty of Care' 'causation' 'contributory Negligence' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'recovery of Damages and Workers Compensation Repayment Under Workers Compensation Act 1987, S 151 Z']
['torts' 'negligence' 'personal Injury' 'civil Procedure' 'workers Compensation'] ['slip and Fall on Travelator' 'obvious Risk Under Civil Liability Act 2002' 'breach of Duty of Care' 'causation' 'contributory Negligence' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'recovery of Damages and Workers Compensation Repayment Under Workers Compensation Act 1987, S 151 Z']

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

Torts Negligence Personal Injury Slip and Fall Appeal and Motion for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal / Appeal From District Court Judgment and Second Respondent's Motion for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the risk of slipping after walking over a wet mopped surface and stepping onto a moving metal travelator was an obvious risk within Civil Liability Act 2002, s 5F.' 'Whether Glad Cleaning breached its duty of care by mopping the rubber tiles near the travelator during opening hours rather than before the Centre opened.' "Whether moisture on the Plaintiff's shoes caused her to slip on the travelator." "Whether the primary Judge's assessment of the Plaintiff's contributory negligence at ten per cent should be disturbed." 'Whether Mirvac should be granted an extension of time to file a notice of appeal where it had paid part of the damages judgment and s 151Z of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 was engaged.']

Ratio Decidendi

Mirvac's payment of part of the damages award to the Plaintiff was money paid and received as damages and enlivened s 151Z(1)(b) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987, so an extension of time to appeal could cause irremediable prejudice and was refused. Glad Cleaning's appeal failed because the specific risk created by wet shoe soles contacting the moving metal travelator was not obvious to a reasonable person in the Plaintiff's position; Glad Cleaning breached its duty by not conducting the regular cleaning of the rubber tiles before the Centre opened when there was no proven Mirvac direction preventing it; the evidence supported the inference that moisture on the Plaintiff's shoes caused...

Court Disposition

Mirvac's motion for an extension of time was dismissed and Glad Cleaning's appeal was dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Dismiss the motion filed by the second respondent ("Mirvac") on 28 August 2013 seeking an extension of time for the filing of a notice of appeal.' 'Order Mirvac to pay the costs of the appellant ("Glad Cleaning") and the first respondent ("the Plaintiff") of the motion.' "Dismiss Glad Cleaning's appeal." 'Order...