Safety Requirements for Retailers

In Pick ‘n Pay Retailers (Pty) Ltd v Williams and Another, the Court held that this duty includes taking reasonable measures to prevent or mitigate foreseeable risks of harm. In delictual terms, wrongfulness may lie in a retailer’s negligent failure to act positively to avoid harm to another, as emphasised in Matlou v Big Save (Pty) Ltd.

How Is Negligence Assessed?

In Matlou, the Court considered the measures a retailer ought reasonably to take to prevent foreseeable harm. The enquiry includes:

1. the extent or degree of the risk arising from the conduct complained of;
2. the seriousness or gravity of the possible consequences of that risk;
3. the usefulness or utility of the conduct complained of; and
4. the burden involved in eliminating the risk of harm.

The Court held that a retailer cannot invite shoppers onto its premises and reasonably expect them to walk around looking for goods without being entitled to expect that they will be safe.

Disclaimer Notices Are Not A Complete Defence

Should you slip and fall and be injured while shopping for the perfect braaivleis to celebrate Heritage Day, there may be better recourse in law than at the bottom of a bottle.

Do not be driven to drink when you see a disclaimer notice on the wall while you lick your wounds. Retailers must also realise that a general disclaimer notice does not guarantee freedom from liability where a consumer is injured because the retailer failed to take reasonable measures to prevent or mitigate foreseeable harm.

For more on the enforceability and limits of disclaimer notices, read Anja Cremer’s article on disclaimer notices and exclusion of liability.

The content does not constitute legal advice, are not intended to be a substitute for legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Kindly contact us on info@cklaw.co.za or 021 556 9864 to speak to one of our attorneys.