Woolworths (SA) Limited v Drakos

Woolworths (South Australia) Limited sought special leave to appeal from a decision of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia concerning a slip-and-fall incident. The respondent, George Anastasios Drakos, had suffered injury after slipping on a substance, found to be oil, on the floor of a commercial premises operated by the applicant. The case highlighted a divergence in judicial approaches across Australian states regarding occupier's liability, particularly in the context of "slip cases" in commercial settings.

The central legal issue before the High Court was the correct application of the law to determine an occupier's liability for injuries sustained by a person on their premises. This involved considering the impact of legislative provisions in various states that had codified or modified the common law principles of occupier's liability, especially in light of the High Court's decision in *Zaluzna*. The applicant argued for a consistent approach, referencing decisions from New South Wales and Victoria, while the South Australian Full Court's judgment in the present case represented a different interpretation.

The applicant's counsel drew the Court's attention to legislation in South Australia, Victoria, and Western Australia, which, in their submission, directed that an occupier's liability be determined in accordance with the principles of the law of negligence. This legislative framework was enacted prior to the *Zaluzna* decision. The facts presented indicated that the respondent slipped on oil, and while the floor manager's evidence regarding the presence of oil was not fully accepted, her evidence concerning cleaning and safety measures was. The floor manager's duties included monitoring the floor's condition, and there was also provision for other employees to clean up soiled areas as directed.