Super-Pharm Ordered to Pay Woman $57,000 After Slipping Incident
Translated & summarized from Ynet by baba
A Beersheba court ordered Super-Pharm to pay a woman approximately $57,000 in damages and legal fees after she slipped on a wet floor in one of its stores in 2018, sustaining injuries that led to CRPS. The court found the supermarket chain solely responsible for the incident.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Super-Pharm ordered to pay $57,000 for a customer's slip and fall.
- Woman injured in 2018 slip, diagnosed with CRPS.
- Court found Super-Pharm solely responsible for the hazard.
- Supermarket failed to provide security footage or incident reports.
- Woman found 5% contributorily negligent.
A Beersheba Magistrate's Court has ordered the supermarket chain Super-Pharm to pay approximately 170,000 shekels (about $46,000) in compensation to a woman who slipped and fell in one of its stores. The total payout, including legal fees and expenses, amounts to around 210,000 shekels (about $57,000).
The incident occurred in June 2018 when the 56-year-old woman was shopping at a Super-Pharm Deal branch in Beersheba. She claims she slipped on cleaning fluid or soap on the floor in the cleaning supplies aisle, injuring her right hand. She subsequently underwent reconstructive surgery and was diagnosed with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS).
Super-Pharm initially denied the accident occurred and the existence of a hazard. The company also argued that if an accident did happen, responsibility lay with the cleaning company contracted for the store. However, the court accepted the woman's account, citing her testimony, her sister's testimony, and a Soroka Medical Center document from the day of the incident stating she "slipped on soap at Super-Pharm in the Ramot neighborhood."
The court also noted that Super-Pharm failed to present security camera footage or an incident report, and did not call store management or other employees to testify. Judge Yaron Golan ruled that Super-Pharm bore sole responsibility for the accident, as it has a clear duty of care to its customers and should have anticipated the risk of slipping, especially near cleaning product displays.
While the judge acknowledged the woman bore some minor responsibility, attributing 5% of the fault to her for not being more cautious in a known potentially hazardous area, the majority of the blame was placed on the supermarket. The court rejected Super-Pharm's attempt to shift blame to the cleaning company, as there was no proof their employees caused the hazard or were negligent. The woman was awarded compensation based on her recognized medical and functional disabilities resulting from the fall.
