Simon Felice v St George Masonic Club [2017] NSWDC 276

Simon Felice v St George Masonic Club [2017] NSWDC 276

The wet tiled ramp presented a foreseeable and not insignificant risk of slipping that was greater than was apparent to patrons because the degree of slipperiness and inadequate friction coefficient were not visible. Reasonable non-burdensome precautions such as slip-resistant treatment, grip tape or absorbent mats...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Personal Injury Damages Claim in Tort Concerning Occupier's Liability / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff with damages reduced by 10% for contributory negligence; defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs.
Legal Topics
["occupier's Liability" 'slip and Fall' 'negligence' 'causation' 'contributory Negligence' 'assessment of Damages' 'economic Loss' 'redundancy']
['tort' 'civil Liability' 'personal Injury'] ["occupier's Liability" 'slip and Fall' 'negligence' 'causation' 'contributory Negligence' 'assessment of Damages' 'economic Loss' 'redundancy']

Source-derived case record

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 in Tort Concerning Occupier's Liability / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendant breached its duty of care to the plaintiff by failing to take reasonable precautions against the risk of slipping on a wet tiled exit ramp.' "Whether the plaintiff's fall was caused by the slippery wet tiles and the defendant's failure to take precautions." 'Whether the plaintiff was contributorily negligent by failing to use or keep his hand near the handrail.' 'How damages should be assessed, including economic loss after the plaintiff accepted voluntary redundancy.']

Ratio Decidendi

The wet tiled ramp presented a foreseeable and not insignificant risk of slipping that was greater than was apparent to patrons because the degree of slipperiness and inadequate friction coefficient were not visible. Reasonable non-burdensome precautions such as slip-resistant treatment, grip tape or absorbent mats ought to have been taken. The wet hazardous tiles probably caused the plaintiff's fall, and the defendant's failure to take precautions was a necessary condition of the harm. The plaintiff was contributorily negligent to the extent of 10% because, knowing the ramp was wet and moving near the handrail, he ought reasonably to have used or kept his hand near it. The redundancy was...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff with damages reduced by 10% for contributory negligence; defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs.

Orders

  • ['Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant in the sum of $177,009.00.' "Defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs."]