The SCA yesterday dismissed with costs an application by Pick n Pay Retailers for reconsideration of a ruling by SCA Judges Fikile Mokgohloa and Wendy Hughes dismissing with costs the company’s petition for leave to appeal the High Court judgment.

Moneyweb reports that Mokgohloa and Hughes had dismissed Pick n Pay’s petition for leave to appeal on the basis that the proposed appeal lacked reasonable prospects of success and no other compelling reason existed to justify the matter being entertained on appeal.

However, SCA Deputy President Dumisani Zondi on 30 April 2024 ordered that Pick n Pay’s application be referred for reconsideration and possible variation in terms of the Superior Courts Act.

As previously reported, Maria Williams was shopping with her sister at the N1 City Mall Pick n Pay store in Goodwood on 13 November 2017. She slipped on some spillage and fell to the floor. She testified that she did not see any cleaning staff in the immediate vicinity of where she fell and the size of the spillage was about equal to an A3 piece of paper.

Williams disputed that the spillage was the size of a two-rand coin, as was asserted on behalf of Pick n Pay.

As a result of the fall, Williams sustained a soft tissue injury to her left hip and an injury to her left acromioclavicular joint.

Immediate assistance was provided to her by a customer services manager employed by Pick n Pay, who also arranged for her to be transported to a nearby hospital for medical treatment. It was alleged that Pick n Pay undertook to bear Williams’s medical treatment costs but despite these assurances, Pick n Pay failed to honour its undertaking.

This prompted Williams to institute legal proceedings against Pick n Pay in the Western Cape High Court, where she sought payment of damages for past and future hospital, medical and related expenses, past and future loss of earnings, and general damages for pain and suffering.

Judge Patrick Gamble ruled in the Western Cape High Court on 1 September 2023 that Pick n Pay had failed to discharge the evidentiary burden required to rebut the prima facie case of negligence established by Williams.

Aggrieved by the High Court’s findings, Pick n Pay sought leave to appeal the decision to the Full Court of the Western Cape High Court on the grounds that the court had misdirected itself. 

Moneyweb notes that the High Court dismissed the application for leave to appeal on 31 October 2023 on the basis that Pick n Pay had failed to show there was a reasonable prospect of success on appeal or ‘there is some other compelling reason why the appeal should be heard’.

This resulted in Pick n Pay petitioning the SCA for leave to appeal on the same grounds as in the High Court.

SCA Judges Daniel Dlodlo (Acting), Xola Petse and Boissie Mbha (Acting) said Pick n Pay concedes it owed a general duty of care to all patrons entering its premises to ensure the store was reasonably safe for shopping activities but denies liability for the injuries sustained by Williams.

Moneyweb notes that he said the evidence emerging from the record reveals that, on the day in question Pick n Pay – represented by one of its employees – was made aware of Williams’ injury not by its own staff, but by a field marketer employed by a third party.

‘This fact is material in evaluating the adequacy of Pick n Pay’s internal safety protocols and its responsiveness to hazardous conditions on the premises as and when they arose,’ he said.

The prolonged presence of the spill, coupled with lapses in procedural oversight, amounts to conduct that falls short of the standard expected.

‘Accordingly, Pick n Pay’s omission in this regard is indicative of negligence.’

Full Moneyweb report

Judgment