When a love for ‘proper coffee’ meant the man was in a rush – ‘probably not the best decision he has ever made’
What happened?
A Swiss executive was due to board his flight at Heathrow. He had a love for ‘proper coffee’, so went to a Starbucks where he bought four drinks.
His flight was then called, so the man had to rush to the boarding gate, while carrying a tray (presumably a cardboard tray).
In doing so he slipped on a puddle of Baileys, and hit his head on the floor. He suffered brain damage which subsequently meant he was unable to work again and was forced to close his office supplies company. The court heard he suffers from headaches which can last up to two weeks and struggles with forgetfulness.
He sued the airline claiming they were at fault for not putting out a floor covering or signage warning him of the spill.
Legal Outcome
The judge said he found it ‘unusual that no immediate steps were taken by anyone from the airline to prevent an accident’, adding: ‘It is likely, and I accept that the airline has demonstrated this, that he has not taken as much care as he should reasonably have been expected to.’
Previously, the man was awarded £130,000, but he was allowed to make another claim in the light of the long term impact on the man’s health and his business. In the second case, the man claimed £5million in compensation.
The judge ruled in favour of the 35-year-old man, but added as he was rushing, he could not award the full amount because in part he should have been more careful, saying he was only able to entitle the man to 80 per cent of the compensation claim (£4 million). The airline is contesting this, and it may require another court hearing if no agreement is reached.
Judge Saunders said: ‘it (buying the coffee) was probably not the best decision that he has ever made.
What can we learn from what happened?
The details of how the amount of compensation the man was due to receive was calculated are not known, but the sizeable payout will reflect not only the long-term impact on the man’s life, but also the loss of business income as a result.
The accident could have happened to someone for whom the commercial impact was so significant, so a lower amount could potentially apply, but the health impact would still be the same. Either way, it an example of when a very well understood risk, generated by a spillage of a slippery and creamy liquid, was not dealt with quickly enough. The law would not expect these slip hazards to miraculously disappear the moment they happen, but would expect a response within a reasonable timescale. The context of the environment is important – the approach to the boarding gate is one where passengers are very liable to be in a hurry, with or without coffees. Whether there is a greater propensity for passengers to carry and spill Baileys is another matter.
Source of Information
Daily Mail Online