‘Mind the step’

Home Office v Lowles [2004] EWCA Civ 985

The pragmatic approach to the assessment of risk in a tripping case adopted in Marks and Spencer plc v Palmer [2001] EWCA 1528, in assessing the suitability of a floor surface, was applied in the present case where a two-inch step posed a ‘substantial risk of tripping’. The step was at the external door of a Portakabin at the entrance to Armley Prison, where the claimant worked. Hundreds of people used the entrance every week; there had been no previous accidents or complaints; people using the entrance included visitors, some with varying degrees of mobility and various types of footwear, and paying different degrees of attention. To be balanced against this, the step did pose a substantial risk of tripping: it was at the top of a ramp where one would not necessarily expect it and a pedestrian’s attention would be drawn to the window where the officer permitting entrance was placed. There was a notice in red stating ‘Please mind the step’ but there were several other signs and the door was ‘busy’ with information. The claimant was not concentrating because she was speaking to a colleague at the time she tripped, and in all the circumstances the Court of Appeal did not interfere with the trial judge’s finding for the claimant but made a reduction of 50% for her contributory negligence.