A slip and fall compensation claim is a legal claims process that can be pursued by someone who has been injured as a direct result of a slip and fall accident, and believes that they can prove that it was caused by the negligence of someone who had a duty of care to them in that location.
There are a few key terms here that should be explained in order to understand if you are eligible for claiming slip and fall compensation:
- Duty of Care: You must be able to prove that the owner or occupier of the space where you fell owed you a duty of care. This is quite simple in most places open to the public where the owner or occupier owes a duty of care to their customers and staff.
- Negligence of the person responsible: In order to have a successful case you must be able to prove that the person responsible failed to act in a manner that a reasonably prudent person would have acted to prevent the circumstances which led to the accident.
- Injured as a direct result of a slip and fall accident: In slip and fall cases you can only sue for losses you’ve incurred, which means that in order for the case to be economically viable you usually need to have had aninjury that results in time of work and ongoing medical bills.
- Reasonable person: The term reasonable or reasonable person is a benchmark used in common law to refer to someone with average judgement or skill. A reasonable person is considered to have a sense of self preservative, risk aversion and sound judgement. If someone acts in a reasonable manner they would take steps ensure the health and safety of themselves and those around them. You would be considered unreasonable if you failed to do so despite having adequate warning or opportunity.
How do you prove fault in a slip and fall claim?
Probably the most difficult thing to prove in a slip and fall claim is that it was caused as a breach of duty of care or negligence of the party responsible. Without this it would be very hard to win your case. Here are some question you might ask to help prove that the party responsible was in breach of their duty of care:
- Was the property owner or employee aware of the hazard? If they were aware of the hazard did they have long enough to rectify it before the accident occured?
- If the property owner or employee was not aware of the hazard would a prudent or reasonable person have been aware of the hazard before the accident occured? For example if there was a spill on one of the aisles that had been there for the entire day, a reasonable employee or property owner should have been aware of it.
- Is there a policy of routinely checking for hazards on the property? Were there any logs or records of this hazard?
- Was there a reasonable cause for the obstacle or hazard to be created? Was it reasonable that it should still have been there at the time of the accident?
- Was there a way for the hazard to me made less dangerous through signage, blocking off access or relocating the obstacle?
When discussing proving fault you must also ensure that you didn’t cause the accident yourself. If you were partially at fault for the accident your compensation would be limited. Some question to consider are:
- Did you do anything that might have prevented you from noticing the hazard, such as texting on the phone?
- Did you have lawful access to the location? Was there a reasonable excuse for you being there?
- Did you ignore adequate warning signs or safety measures?
It is important to consider these questions to ensure that you were not at fault or partially at fault for the accident in the eyes of the court.
The information is current as at the date of publication of this article. The above article is of a general nature only and does not constitute legal advice. Law Advice Compensation Lawyers are experts in public liability compensation claims. For a free, no obligation assessment of your public liability claim call us on 1800 122 555 or complete our Free Claim Advice Form and get the compensation you deserve.