A 72-year-old pensioner will receive compensation after a serious fall at a popular Grabouw farmstall in 2019. The woman slipped on a wet and slippery wooden walkway that connected various shops housed in pop-up containers, leading to significant injuries. The fall occurred when she tried to avoid a stack of crates protruding from the front of a container. As she attempted to swerve, her feet slipped on the wet, dirty deck, causing her to fall heavily onto her right side. She sustained a compound fracture of her femur, along with other injuries.
The woman argued that the farmstall was negligent in allowing the walkway to remain wet and slippery without proper warning or attempts to address the hazard. The Western Cape High Court’s judgment acknowledged the claim, as it was clear the wooden deck had not been adequately maintained. Wet floor signage was not placed on the walkway, and the crates in front of the container added an unexpected hazard, forcing her to swerve. Judge Adrian Montzinger ruled in her favor, finding that the combination of the crates and the slippery floor created a clear risk of a slip-and-fall accident.
In his judgment, Montzinger emphasized that the pensioner’s fall was not due to her tripping over her own feet but was caused by the slippery condition of the deck. He also rejected the defense argument that the woman was partly at fault for not paying attention to her surroundings or wearing smooth-soled shoes. He noted that the plaintiff was walking slowly, as she was likely focused on the displayed goods in the shops, not on every step. “Customers don’t walk with their eyes glued to the ground,” Montzinger said, pointing out that the crates were positioned in a way that made them difficult to see until the woman was already close.
In a contrasting case in Cape Town, the same court ruled against a woman who sought damages from the City after tripping over uneven paving on a sidewalk. The incident occurred in October 2017 while the woman was showing a tourist friend around. She fell on Victoria Road in Camps Bay and sustained a knee injury that later required treatment for a comminuted patella fracture. However, the City disputed any negligence, arguing that it was unaware of the defect and had no prior complaints about the uneven surface.
Judge Montzinger ruled against the woman, stating that she did not provide evidence to show the City could have reasonably known about the dangerous condition of the sidewalk or failed to take action. He explained that the City could not be expected to act on every potential hazard without specific complaints or clear indications of a problem. He further noted that the City was responsible for regular checks of public spaces, but it was not obligated to continually monitor every inch of sidewalk for defects.
Both cases highlight the legal complexities surrounding public safety and the responsibility of property owners or municipalities to maintain spaces used by the public. While the pensioner in Grabouw received compensation for the dangerous conditions that led to her fall, the woman in Cape Town was unable to prove negligence in her case, underscoring the importance of evidence in such claims.
