Introduction: In the case of Pieterse v FLM SA (Pty) Ltd and Others, the court examined the issue of negligence surrounding a
slip-and-fall incident on an uneven sidewalk leading to a business premises.
The plaintiff sustained injuries and sought damages, alleging that the
defendants failed in their legal duty to maintain safe premises.
Summary of Law: The plaintiff argued that the defendants had a
legal duty to ensure the safety of exterior sidewalks and entrances to their
business premises. However, the court found that the presence of a disclaimer
notice and the fair condition of the paving negated claims of negligence. It
emphasized that reasonable expectations regarding pavement conditions should be
considered, and the plaintiff's own negligence was highlighted.
Court's Findings: Despite the plaintiff's claims, the court
determined that the defendants had a system in place for repairs and
maintenance, and no previous complaints had been raised regarding the
pavement's condition. Applying the test for negligence, the court found no
evidence of a dangerous situation that the defendants could have reasonably
foreseen, leading to the dismissal of the plaintiff's claim. Additionally, the
plaintiff's failure to prove the location and cause of her fall, as well as her
own negligence, contributed to the dismissal of the claim.
Conclusion: The court's decision underscores the critical
importance of evaluating the reasonableness of expectations concerning the
condition of premises. It highlights the necessity for individuals to take
responsibility for their safety and exercise caution. Ultimately, the
plaintiff's claim was dismissed, emphasizing the importance of fulfilling the
burden of proof in cases of alleged negligence.
