The Gauteng High Court Pretoria found that a woman cannot blame a gambling establishment for the fact that she had slipped and injured herself as she left a toilet on the premises. The Gauteng High Court, Pretoria turned down the damages claim of a woman who slipped and fell as she came out of a toilet.
The Gauteng High Court Pretoria has found that a woman cannot blame a gambling establishment for the fact that she had slipped and injured herself as she left a toilet on the premises.
The regular customer of the Gold Valley Lounge in Pretoria turned to the court to claim damages after she said she broke both her ankles and injured her arm when she slipped after using the toilet on the premises.
Lephoto Malindi said Gold Valley Lounge had a duty to warn patrons that the floor of the toilet was wet and slippery.
The gambling lounge is situated at a shopping centre.
One of Malindi’s complaints was that there were no signs or warnings placed on the scene to alert people of a dangerous or slippery floor.
In defending the claim, the lounge said a number of people, including the plaintiff, walked over the area where she slipped prior to her fall, and many more walked over the same area after her fall, and none of them slipped or stumbled and fell.
Malindi testified that on January 30, 2021, she was at Gold Valley Lounge as a patron. She explained that the two buildings of Gold Valley Lounge and the toilet are separated by a corridor. If you want to go to the toilet, you leave Gold Valley Lounge through the back door into the corridor. Then you have to climb the stairs that take you to the door of the toilet.
She said that each day she spent in the lounge, she went about four or five times to the toilet.
On the day of the incident, she was leaving the bathroom when she stepped on a cardboard box, which caused her to fall. The cardboard box was located at the bottom of the stairs meant for patrons exiting and entering the toilets.
Malindi attempted to catch hold of something during the fall motion; however, she was unable to prevent her fall.
She said that while she was lying on the floor, she saw that the cardboard box she stepped on was wet and torn. The cardboard box was placed in front of the stairs that led to the toilet used by the employees of the defendant.
One of the cleaners saw her sitting at the step and came to her aid, giving her some ice to place on her ankle.
The court was told that after the incident, improvements have been made, such as hand railings at the stairs, reflectors installed on the steps and a rubber mat bolted in place.
It was said on behalf of the defendant that other shop owners in the complex complained that the gambling patrons used a eatery’s toilets when their shops were closed, seeing that the defendant operated 24 hours.
A storeroom was then converted into a toilet, and a gate was installed to prevent the defendant’s customers from utilising the restaurant’s toilets.
There was always a cardboard box placed in front of the steps at the toilet because of a leak coming from the roof and the cleaners from the lounge kept the toilet neat.
Acting Judge Molefe Matsemela remarked that the fact that the defendant was cleaning and maintaining the toilet does not necessarily mean that it has exclusive control over the toilet. The judge, in turning down the claim, said Malindi should have joined the owners or managing agent of the building as defendants.
He concluded that the defendant had no control over the leak coming from the roof and could thus not be held responsible.
Cape Times
Related Topics: