The High Court has dismissed a security worker’s personal injury claim over a fall involving a supermarket trolley at work in Drogheda, finding he had not proved that the incident was accidental.
In a judgment delivered on 16 February 2024, Mr Justice Paul Coffey said he could not be satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the incident was an accident rather than an intentional act. He added that, even if that conclusion was wrong, the worker had seen the trolley and had enough space to pass it safely, so ordinary care would have avoided the incident.
The plaintiff, named in the judgment as Ivan Bubak, was employed by OCS One Complete Solution Limited as a security man at a Tesco Ireland Limited supermarket. He claimed that at about 9.30pm on 10 June 2020, his right foot caught on a trolley wheel as he left a storeroom, causing him to fall. He said he injured his head, chest, lung, knee and, principally, his lower back, which he claimed continued to cause constant pain.
He alleged that trolleys cluttered both sides of a narrow passageway, making the exit route hazardous. The defendants denied liability. They argued that the trip was intentional or, alternatively, that the plaintiff had a clear path but failed to use it with due care.
CCTV captured the approach to and exit from the storeroom. The judge noted that footage showed the plaintiff had passed the trolleys several times earlier that day. It also showed no obstruction to his access to the storeroom door. As he entered, he pulled the rear of the trolley on his left slightly towards himself, leaving it intruding only immaterially into the path he would take when returning.
The judge said footage immediately before the fall showed the plaintiff facing the trolley and that there was room to pass to its left. He found that the plaintiff instead extended his right leg away from his line of travel and hooked it around the trolley’s rear left wheel. The plaintiff denied doing so deliberately but gave no explanation for his action, according to the judgment.
The judge also referred to the plaintiff’s responses about a history of intermittent lower back pain, which he had acknowledged in his pleadings. He dismissed the claim. The judgment does not set out a damages award or other order.