Kanwarjit Singh Juj v John Lewis Partnership Plc

Kanwarjit Singh Juj v John Lewis Partnership Plc

The respondent was an occupier of the car park but its control was limited to dealing with immediate hazards and reporting to the owner. The kerb was obvious and not defective; there was no duty to warn or alter the bay. Earlier reporting would not have changed the outcome. The claimant's accident was not caused by any breach of duty but by his own misjudgment. The appeal is dismissed.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Mr Kanwarjit Singh Juj; Respondent/defendant: John Lewis Partnership PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (personal Injury) / Second Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Duty of Care, Personal Injury, Control and Occupation of Premises, Obvious Dangers, Causation, Disabled Access
Tort Law Occupiers' Liability Duty of Care Personal Injury Control and Occupation of Premises Obvious Dangers Causation Disabled Access

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Kanwarjit Singh Juj

Appellant/claimant

John Lewis Partnership PLC

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (personal Injury) / Second Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent was an occupier of the car park under the Occupiers Liability Act 1957
  2. 2 Scope and extent of the respondent's duty of care under section 2 of the 1957 Act
  3. 3 Whether the kerb constituted an unreasonable danger to disabled users

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent was an occupier of the car park but its control was limited to dealing with immediate hazards and reporting to the owner. The kerb was obvious and not defective; there was no duty to warn or alter the bay. Earlier reporting would not have changed the outcome. The claimant's accident was not caused by any breach of duty but by his own misjudgment. The appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed