|Decision||1. Appeal allowed.2. Set aside the judgment and orders of the District Court of 29 August 2012.
3. In lieu thereof, order that the proceedings in the District Court be dismissed with costs.
4. That the respondent pay the appellant’s costs of the proceedings in this Court.
5. Grant to the respondent a certificate under the Suitors Fund Act 1951 if qualified.
[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court’s computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]
|Catchwords|| TORTS – negligence – occupiers’ liability – plaintiff fell in defendant’s supermarket – small pieces of cardboard on the floor in the vicinity of the fall – causation – whether the plaintiff established that she trod on the cardboard – whether the plaintiff established that the cardboard was a slip hazard – assessment of damages – where evidence of treating doctors indicated minor injury in consequence of fall – more serious consequences suggested in medico-legal reports but loss of capacity to earn quite limited – finding of 20 per cent of a most extreme case not supportable – findings as to loss of earning capacity not supportable.
David Cormack – Brisbane Barrister.