Caldwell v Coles Supermarkets Pty Limited [2010] NSWDC 136

Caldwell v Coles Supermarkets Pty Limited [2010] NSWDC 136

The plaintiff proved that he slipped and fell because of oil or grease on the floor at the defendant's loading dock. The risk of serious injury was foreseeable and not insignificant, and simple, inexpensive precautions including regular cleaning could and should have been taken. The defendant breached its duty of care and that breach caused the plaintiff's injury. The plaintiff was not contributorily negligent because the risk was not reasonably foreseeable to him and he did not fail to take reasonable care for his own safety. The defendant failed to prove negligence by the plaintiff's employer for the purposes of s 151Z(2) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987. The plaintiff had a...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Personal Injury Damages Claim / Judgment After Hearing in the District Court of New South Wales
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant for $396,644, with the defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs and leave to apply for another costs order within 14 days.
Legal Topics
["slip and Fall on Occupier's Premises" 'causation' 'contributory Negligence' 'reduction Under S 151 Z(2) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987' 'assessment of Damages' 'future Economic Loss']
['personal Injury' 'negligence' 'damages' 'workers Compensation'] ["slip and Fall on Occupier's Premises" 'causation' 'contributory Negligence' 'reduction Under S 151 Z(2) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987' 'assessment of Damages' 'future Economic Loss']

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

Civil Personal Injury Damages Claim / Judgment After Hearing in the District Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiff's fall and injury were caused by the condition of the floor at the defendant's premises." 'Whether the defendant breached its duty of care as occupier of the premises.' 'Whether the plaintiff was contributorily negligent.' "Whether the plaintiff's damages should be reduced pursuant to s 151Z(2) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 because of negligence by his employer." "Whether the plaintiff's ongoing disability reduced his earning capacity and was productive of financial loss." "The proper assessment of damages for the plaintiff's shoulder injury."]

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff proved that he slipped and fell because of oil or grease on the floor at the defendant's loading dock. The risk of serious injury was foreseeable and not insignificant, and simple, inexpensive precautions including regular cleaning could and should have been taken. The defendant breached its duty of care and that breach caused the plaintiff's injury. The plaintiff was not contributorily negligent because the risk was not reasonably foreseeable to him and he did not fail to take reasonable care for his own safety. The defendant failed to prove negligence by the plaintiff's employer for the purposes of s 151Z(2) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987. The plaintiff had a...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant for $396,644, with the defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs and leave to apply for another costs order within 14 days.

Orders

  • ['Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant for $396,644.' "Defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs." 'Leave to apply for some other costs order within 14 days.']