Bell v Travco Hotels Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE,LORD JUSTICE SINGLETON,LORD JUSTICE HODSON |
| Judgment Date | 11 February 1953 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1953] EWCA Civ J0211-1 |
| Docket Number | 1951 B. No. 5585 |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
| Date | 11 February 1953 |
[1953] EWCA Civ J0211-1
The Lord Chief Justice of England, (Lord Goddard)
Lord Justice Singleton, and
Lord Justice Hodson
In The Supreme Court of Judicature
Court of Appeal
Counsel for the Appellants: MR JOHN THOMPSON, instructed by Mr Fred Hollis.
Counsel for the Respondent: MR B. S. WINGATE-SAUL, instructed by Messrs. Claremont, Haynes & Co.
This is an appeal from a judgment of Mr Justice Havers, who found for the Plaintiff in an action brought to recover damages for personal injuries in most unusual circumstances; in fact, for many years I never remember a case like this. It is one of those cases in which the injury which was caused was due to a slip, and, as everybody knows, slipping is one of the most usual incidents which take place in the changes and chances of this mortal life. As Lord Justice Somervell put it in the case of Davies v. De Havilland, Ltd., reported in Volume 2 of the All England Law Reports for 1950 at page 583: "It would be impracticable to maintain passages and roads and pathways so that there was never a slippery place, especially after rain, on which a man might slip. Slipping is quite a common incident of life, and usually no harm is done. The victim usually suffers no permanent injury, but, unfortunately, the plaintiff received serious damage to his ankle."
Nowadays, if somebody is ever unfortunate enough to meet with an accident from which some injury is received, it is always thought that there ought to be somebody to pay. I think that that idea is getting far too common. It is not for every injury that a person may sustain in the course of every-day life that he or she can recover compensation; they can only recover compensation if that injury is due to the fault of somebody else who owes a duty to that person.
The simple facts in this case are these: The Plaintiff was one of a party who was going on a coach tour through parts of England and Scotland, and, as everybody knows, motor coach companies make arrangements for the passengers to stay at night in various hotels.The party arrived in the evening at an hotel at Grange-over-Sands, and having had dinner, the Plaintiff and her friends thought they would like to go out and have a last look at the sea, it being a fine and bright evening on the 1st June. She went down the drive, which is a steep drive — there is no question about that — but I do not think anyone said that this drive was in itself a dangerous drive. When they got almost to the bottom of the drive itself where it joins the main road, she walking on the left, there being almost a camber at that place, slipped. At any rate, down she went, and it is said that her friends who were walking with her found it was slippery. She sustained a broken ankle, or what is called a Potts fracture just above the ankle, which I think most people know is a very common injury and one which may be sustained by anyone twisting an ankle in a rut and falling down. It was a most painful injury and a regrettable one.
A gentleman was called who was an expert auctioneer and surveyor; he certainly was not an expert roadmaker, as far as I know, and he gave evidence to the effect that this was a perfectly well-made road; it was a road which had existed in this condition certainly for three years, and without apparently, as far as the evidence goes, any complaint; nothing has been done to it since, and it has been, ever since the accident, in the same condition. What he said was, as I understand his evidence, that some of the larger stones which go to make up this road had got shiny or polished; it was not like, perhaps, some of the streets in London where surfacing material is used which seems to have a very rough appearance and is specially designed to prevent skidding; but in the case of ordinary roads which one meets with in this country, and I shouldcertainly think in the case of an ordinary drive which has been me talled, there must be places which are slippery from time to time, and places in which it is possible to slip, but I cannot see myself that there was any evidence here that would justify this place being called...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ward v James
...but the company denied it and said that their duty was only to use reasonable care themselves (a test afterwards upheld in Bell v. Travco Hotels Limited, (1953) 1 Queen's Bench Division, page 473). That issue depended on an examination of the authorities. The Master ordered trial by jury. H......
- Hoyte v Kirpalani Ltd
-
Victoria Mutual Building Society v Barbara Berry
...in this case which took it outside the general law applicable to "slip and fall" cases. ( Wheat v. Lacon [1966] 1 All ER 582; Bell v Travco Hotels Ltd (1953) 1 All ER 638; Davis v DeHavilland Aircraft Co. Ltd. (1950) 2 All ER 583; Anatra v Ciboney Hotel Ltd. & Anor. Unreported SC C.L. A-1......
-
Anatra (Marie) v Ciboney Hotel Ltd and Ciboney Ocho Rios Ltd
...v. Segar (1917) 2 K.B. 325 Wheat v. E. Lakon Ltd. — H/L Appleton v. Cunard Steam Ship Co. Ltd. (1969) Vol. 1 -Lloyd's Law Reports Bell v. Travco Ltd. (1953) 1 AER 638 49 Section 3(4) of the Occupier's Liability Act imposes a duty of care on the occupier — a burden of proof lies on the occu......