Pete v Boxer Superstore (Pty) Ltd (1785/2021) [2022] ZAECPEHC 9 (5 May 2022)

Pete v Boxer Superstore (Pty) Ltd (1785/2021) [2022] ZAECPEHC 9 (5 May 2022)

The court found that the defendant owed a legal duty to keep the store floor clean and free of hazards for shoppers. The evidence established that the plaintiff slipped on cake flour that had spilled on the floor, likely during the stacking of flour bags by the defendant's employees. The defendant's failure to clean up the spillage constituted a breach of its duty and amounted to wrongful and negligent conduct. The plaintiff was not contributorily negligent, as her attention was reasonably focused on her shopping and the spillage was not readily visible due to the white tiles. The defendant is liable for the damages suffered by the plaintiff as a result of her fall.

Citation
[2022] ZAECPEHC 9
Parties
Plaintiff: Caymore Melissa Pete; Defendant: Boxer Superstore (Pty) Ltd
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 May 2022
Case Number
1785/2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Liability Separated From Quantum; Trial on Merits
Outcome
Defendant declared liable for damages suffered by plaintiff as a result of her fall at defendant's premises.
Judges
Gqamana
Legal Topics
Negligence, Occupier Liability, Slip and Fall, Duty of Care, Apportionment of Liability
Delict Land and Property Negligence Occupier Liability Slip and Fall Duty of Care Apportionment of Liability

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

Caymore Melissa Pete

Plaintiff

Boxer Superstore (Pty) Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Liability Separated From Quantum; Trial on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant owed a legal duty to keep the store floor free of hazards for shoppers.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant was negligent in failing to clean up the cake flour spillage.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff was contributorily negligent in causing her own fall.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant owed a legal duty to keep the store floor clean and free of hazards for shoppers. The evidence established that the plaintiff slipped on cake flour that had spilled on the floor, likely during the stacking of flour bags by the defendant's employees. The defendant's failure to clean up the spillage constituted a breach of its duty and amounted to wrongful and negligent conduct. The plaintiff was not contributorily negligent, as her attention was reasonably focused on her shopping and the spillage was not readily visible due to the white tiles. The defendant is liable for the damages suffered by the plaintiff as a result of her fall.

Court Disposition

Defendant declared liable for damages suffered by plaintiff as a result of her fall at defendant's premises.

Orders

  • The defendant is declared to be liable to the plaintiff for such damages as may be proven arising from her fall on 3 September 2020 at Cleary Park Shopping Mall, Gqeberha.
  • The defendant is ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs of the merits.