Description
The Judge had been side-tracked by the lack of reports of similar accidents, when he ought to have concluded that the footpath had in fact been dangerous, resulting in injury to the appellant. Was clear evidence that the appellant had stumbled and suffered injury, a clear indication of where the accident had occurred, photos showing the uneven surface of the footpath, and supportive expert evidence. Further, although not sufficient on its own, the fact that the respondent had taken swift action to repair the area went some way towards supporting the claim.
