The High Court found the National Museum of Ireland liable for injuries suffered by Warren Baldwin when he fell on a museum staircase in June 2016. The court awarded him €65,000 in general damages and €1,989.59 in agreed special damages, a total of €66,989.59.
Mr Baldwin, who was visiting Dublin from Australia, said he lost his footing on the third last step and fell to the landing. He injured his right quadriceps tendon and later underwent surgery in Australia. The museum disputed that a defect caused the fall, arguing that he had overstepped and that the incident was his own fault.
The judge found Mr Baldwin credible and accepted that he lost his footing on the third last step. The court noted that accounts of the fall varied, including an accident report stating he missed the last step. It also considered that museum staff had viewed CCTV footage, but the footage was not produced and the employee who viewed it did not give evidence. The judge drew an inference against the museum, finding that it should have preserved the footage and called that employee.
The parties’ engineers agreed that the seven steps were Portland stone, built in 1890, and that their dimensions were not at issue. Neither engineer tested their slip resistance. The court found that the step where Mr Baldwin fell was shiny and slippery, and accepted evidence that the front portion was worn. It also found that the handrail ended before the bottom of the staircase, encouraging people to move towards the centre as they descended.
The judge concluded that the museum had failed to provide a safe system, particularly a handrail that could be used for the full descent. The 1997 Building Regulations did not apply retrospectively to the 1890 staircase, but the court said that did not excuse a failure to take reasonable care. It also found that the rarity of previous incidents did not rule out liability.
On the medical evidence, the court preferred the plaintiff’s consultant, who described ongoing weakness and pain following the tendon injury, over the defence orthopaedic surgeon, who attributed current problems largely to age-related changes. The court found no basis for contributory negligence.