Personal Injuries - Negligence - Occupier's liability - Plaintiff fell in defendant's shop - Whether fall spontaneous - Whether defendant liable for fall - Quantum.

The High Court (before Mr Justice Barr); judgment delivered 2 July 1998.

The defendant was liable to the plaintiff for injury suffered by the plaintiff when she fell in the defendant's shop as a result of tripping over carpet nosing which had become raised. The High Court so held in giving judgment for the plaintiff and awarding her a total of £90,500 in damages.

R. N. Keane SC and Noel McCarthy BL for the plaintiff; Gerardine Connolly SC and David Nolan BL for the defendant.

Mr Justice Barr said that the plaintiff was a 78-year-old lady in good physical condition commensurate with her age save for the fact that in 1984 she was fitted with a pace-maker. The plaintiff together with a friend, one Mrs Violet Fagan, had a regular habit for many years of visiting the defendant's department store in the centre of Dublin city. On 19 April 1995 the plaintiff and Mrs Fagan visited the store and during the course of the visit the plaintiff fell and suffered serious injury near the information desk in the store. The cause of that fall was in dispute. The pedestrian isles in the store were of plastic or vinyl material but there was an area of carpet around the information desk. The plaintiff gave evidence that she caught her foot in the carpet nosing and this caused her to fall. Mrs Fagan gave evidence confirming the account of the plaintiff.

Mrs Fagan gave further evidence that she returned to the shop on the following day to avail of a free luncheon voucher given to her on the day of the accident. She said that staff had told her that after the accident the carpet nosing had been nailed down. She said that she saw that the raised area on which the plaintiff had tripped the previous day was now gone.

Mr Eamonn Galavin, a floor manager for the defendant, gave evidence that the carpet nosing was not to his knowledge altered since the accident and he further stated that he saw the plaintiff collapse at least nine inches from the carpet nosing. He stated that he inspected the floor and could find no obstructions or spillages which might have caused the plaintiff to fall. Mr Galavin did not speak to the plaintiff or Mrs Fagan at the time of the accident but made arrangements for the attendance of an ambulance. Mrs Anne Warren, assistant manager in the scarves department of the defendant's store, gave evidence that to the best of her knowledge the plaintiff did not trip and having examined the area immediately after the accident she noticed nothing unusual. Mr John O'Brien, the defendant's senior floor manager, gave evidence that he had also inspected the carpet area after the accident and found nothing wrong with it. He also did not speak to the plaintiff or Mrs Fagan after the accident.

Mr Justice Barr said that the defendant carried its own insurance and responsibility would have to be accepted by Mr O'Brien and Mr Galvin to the company for a defect in the premises within feet of their own work station of which they ought to have been aware. If the evidence given that there was no defect in the carpet was to be accepted the Court would have to conclude that two apparently respectable ladies of conservative background had conspired to commit a serious fraud and deliberately perjured themselves to further that fraud. Such a conclusion would have to be rejected having regard to the nature of their evidence and the manner in which it was given which was redolent of truth. The question as to why Mr O'Brien and Mr Galavin might be untruthful could only be answered by looking at the responsibility that each bears for defects in the premises. Further, neither witness attempted to speak to the plaintiff or Mrs Fagan after the accident as from their perspective it would not have been helpful if either was told about the defective nosing particularly if it was pointed out by Mrs Fagan at the time.

Mr Justice Barr said that he could not accept that the plaintiff had fallen spontaneously nor was there any evidence of contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff. The plaintiff suffered a serious injury which now greatly affects her confidence. She now moves about with a stick and has difficulty getting about. Her left leg is shortened by one and a half inches and she has a limp.

Accordingly, the plaintiff was entitled to a total award of damages of £90,500.

Solicitors: Keans (Dublin) for the plaintiff; Mason, Hayes and Curran (Dublin) for the defendant.