Did you injure yourself when you slipped on a wet floor at the entrance to a building? A carpet was on the scene, but it was not placed in the right place and you fell before reaching it?
In order to obtain compensation for the damage suffered, it will obviously be necessary to prove that there was a fault on the part of the owner of the establishment or the person in charge of maintenance.
In this article, Me Lambert explains the types of faults possible in these circumstances.
Fault in civil liability matters
An owner or landlord has an obligation to provide and maintain an accessible road to get to the building in question. A duty of security attaches to this obligation; it is therefore necessary to ensure that the passage and the surface used to circulate in the building do not cause any harm to others.
However, the presence of water or snow on a shiny surface such as ceramics contributes to making the floor slippery and therefore dangerous. For example, the wet floor of a church vestibule or ice on the steps of stairs have been considered dangerous surfaces by case law.
A fault is then committed if no carpet or non-slip surface is on the premises to ensure the safety of the people who circulate there. The Quebec courts also found that the presence of a carpet with insufficient dimensions and omitted to cover a plot of wet floor did not allow the defendants to absolve themselves of their responsibilities.
In a case where a non-slip surface does indeed cover the entire surface at risk, it will then be necessary to examine whether it is well maintained. If this is not the case, legal recourse will also be possible.
Sharing of responsibility
However, it is important to act diligently when driving around a building, especially when you know that weather conditions can be a risk at the base. It is necessary to be vigilant when moving and pay attention to the warnings that the owner may have installed. Indeed, if there were warnings, the Tribunal could consider that you acted negligently and thus impose a share of responsibility on you.
In order to avoid a sharing of responsibility, it is advisable to take another safer path in cases where the situation allows it. The speed at which you move and the type of shoe you wear will also influence the judge’s decision when determining whether or not the burden of responsibility should be shared.
Finally, please note that each case is a case in point and must be analysed in the light of the facts specific to each case. If you have suffered damage caused by a lack of carpet or a poorly maintained non-slip surface, do not hesitate to contact our firm.
If you liked this article and want to read more, follow our Facebook page so you don’t miss our weekly legal capsules on different legal topics!