Fitzsimmons v Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Ltd

The appeal concerned a claim by the appellant, Ms. Fitzsimmons, against Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Ltd after she slipped and fell in one of its supermarkets. The primary judge in the District Court had found the respondent not liable. The appellant sought to appeal this decision.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the respondent had breached its duty of care to the appellant by failing to take reasonable precautions against the risk of slipping on a wet floor, even though warning signs were in place, and whether the primary judge had erred in assessing damages and in his approach to conflicting expert medical evidence. The court also considered whether an appeal lay as of right or required leave.

The Court of Appeal found that the respondent had breached its duty of care. It reasoned that the presence of wet floor signs did not absolve the supermarket from its obligation to take reasonable steps to prevent harm, particularly when the wetness had been present for several minutes. The court determined that the primary judge had erred in his assessment of damages and in his handling of the expert evidence, noting that the conflicting opinions of medical experts had not been subject to cross-examination.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgment for the defendant and entering judgment for the plaintiff in the amount of $886.50. The court also made orders regarding the filing and service of the notice of appeal and ordered that the appellant pay the respondent's costs in the Court of Appeal.