In the context of an alleged failure to maintain a highway, the question in each case is whether the particular spot where the claimant tripped or fell was dangerous: ‘if the particular spot was not dangerous, then it is irrelevant that there were other spots nearby that were dangerous or that the area as a whole was due for resurfacing’ and ‘In one sense it is reasonably foreseeable that any defect in the highway, however slight, may cause an injury but that is not the test of what is meant by dangerous in this context. It must be the sort of danger which an authority may reasonably be expected to guard against.’
Judges:
Lloyd LJ
Citations:
[1992] PIQR 114
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Healy v Cosmosair Plc and others QBD 28-Jul-2005
The claimant sought damages after being injured diving into a swimming pool in Portugal when on a holiday organised by the defendants. He said that the surrounds of the pool were not provided with appropriate non-slip surfaces. The defendant said . .
Cited – Jones v Rhondda Cynon Taff County Borough Council CA 15-Jul-2008
The claimant, a fireman, sought damages for injuries suffered when he was injured answering a call out. He fell into a depressed area by the road side as he was pulling away a burning wooden pallet.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The court . .
Cited – Griffiths v Gwynedd County Council CA 22-Oct-2015
The claimant cyclist was injured on being thrown from his bicycle going downhill, by a defect in the road. He appealed against a decision that the defect was not a danger. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Personal Injury
Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.229776
