Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Barnard v Peregrine Plaza (Pty) Ltd (14475/20) [2025] ZAWCHC 48 (18 February 2025)
The High Court held the defendant liable for a patron’s slip and fall on a wet wooden walkway caused by winter dew, finding no contributory negligence.
Myathaza v Sportcene Mthatha (5545/2022) [2024] ZAECMHC 53 (20 June 2024)
The High Court held Sportscene 100% liable after finding that the plaintiff slipped on a wet mat at the store entrance and not outside the premises.
Lombard v Mcdonald's Wingtip (38117/2020) [2022] ZAGPPHC 877 (14 November 2022)
Slip-and-fall claim against McDonald’s dismissed after the court held the disclaimer notice was enforceable and the plaintiff failed to prove wetness or negligence.
Pete v Boxer Superstore (Pty) Ltd (1785/2021) [2022] ZAECPEHC 9 (5 May 2022)
Slip-and-fall claim held proved on liability only: the court found Boxer Superstore liable for a flour spillage that caused the plaintiff’s fall.
Frans v Minister of Correctional Services (14141/15) [2021] ZAWCHC 284 (14 June 2021)
The High Court dismissed a delictual claim after finding the plaintiff failed to prove negligence arising from a fall at a correctional facility.
Holtzhausen v Cenprop Real Estate (Pty) Ltd and Another (A116/20) [2021] ZAWCHC 39; [2021] 2 All SA 457 (WCC); 2021 (4) SA 221 (WCC) (3 March 2021)
High Court appeal over a mall slip-and-fall succeeded, with the owner and manager held liable for failing to take reasonable steps against a wet-floor hazard.
De Wet v Gateway Plaza Meatworld CC t/a Meatworld (55046/2017) [2019] ZAGPPHC 1069 (28 November 2019)
A customer slip-and-fall negligence claim was dismissed after the court found the defendant had reasonable safety procedures and the plaintiff failed to prove negligence.
King v Arbour Town (Pty) Ltd and Another (9117/2015) [2019] ZAKZDHC 10 (13 June 2019)
The court dismissed a slip-and-fall claim after finding no proof that the child slipped on a wet floor and no negligence by either the owner or cleaner.
Stacey v Supercare Services Group (Pty) Ltd (A380/2017) [2018] ZAWCHC 117 (13 September 2018)
The court found that the appellant did slip and fall on a spilt ice-cream, as supported by direct and circumstantial evidence. The respondent's cleaning regime was inadequate given the size of the walkway, heavy foot traffic, and the time a spillage could remain undetected (up to 40 minutes). The respondent failed to appreciate its duty to protect public safety and did not allocate sufficient cleaning staff, despite the Service Level Agreement allowing for more cleaners. The cost of additional cleaners would have been minimal and would have reduced the risk. The respondent's management failed…
Source excerpt
Folley v Pick 'n Pay Retailers (Pty) Ltd and Others (15559/2009) [2017] ZAWCHC 86 (23 August 2017)
The court dismissed a shopper’s slip-and-fall claim, finding she had not proved a damp floor caused by cleaners. Costs were apportioned between the parties.
Explore more
