Checkers Supermarket v Lindsay

On 16 September 2005, the respondent, Esme Lindsay, slipped on a patch of oil and fell while shopping at the appellant’s Checkers supermarket in Pinetown, KwaZulu-Natal. The incident occurred in the fruit and vegetable section, a known high-risk area for spillages. She sustained injuries and sued Checkers for damages, alleging negligence. Evidence showed that the supermarket relied on a contracted cleaning service with only one cleaner on duty after 2 pm to monitor a large store with 22 aisles. No cleaner attended the scene during the respondent’s ordeal, and this was the third slip-and-fall incident in the store within approximately a year. The High Court separated liability from quantum and found Checkers negligent. Checkers appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.

This case reinforces South African delictual principles relating to slip-and-fall claims in supermarkets. It clarifies that liability turns on the adequacy of the cleaning and safety system as a whole, rather than proof of how long a spillage existed. The judgment affirms the duty of supermarket owners to implement reasonable, proactive systems tailored to known risks, and it has become an important authority on negligence and occupiers’ liability in retail settings.