Pay me E500 000 for shopping injury'

MBABANE – A 36-year-old man is suing Cashbuild Swaziland for E500 000 after he was injured by a corrugated iron sheet inside the shop.

Philip Dlamini claims that on December 22, 2007, while shopping at Cashbuild Manzini, he was extensively injured by a corrugated iron sheet. He claims he had to undergo medical attention as a result of the injury, which was a result of negligence from the shop’s employee. He alleges that he suffered damages amounting to E500 000, which despite demand the shop refuses, fails or neglects to pay.

He is represented by Sabelo Mngomezulu in the matter.   He claims that when he was exiting the shop, employees pulled a corrugated iron sheet from a pile that had been placed near the exit. He alleges that the pile collapsed and he was in the process cut on the leg.

He argues that the employees who were acting within the scope of their employment with Cashbuild, failed to use reasonable care and caution to ensure the corrugated iron sheets pile did not collapse.
He computes the damages as follows: Medical costs and future medical expenses – E30 000, pain and suffering – E250 000, loss of amenities – E90 000 and E130 000 in respect of permanent scarification.

The matter is still pending in court.
Cashbuild alleges Dlamini failed to exercise a proper lookout while inside the shop and had entered at his own risk.
In its responding papers, through its attorneys Currie and Sibandze, the shop denies that Dlamini was injured.
It also denies that it acted negligently resulting in his alleged injury. It argues that Dlamini had reasonably foreseen that failure to be on the lookout could cause injury to himself, but he never took steps to avoid injury.

“Only in the event that the honourable court finds that the alleged ‘employees’ had acted negligently or negligently failed to act as alleged, the defendant (CashBuild) specifically denies that an employer-employee relationship existed between itself and the alleged employees,” reads part of Cashbuild’s responding papers.  
It also states that there are notices all over the shop warning customers to enter the premises at their own risk, therefore the shop would not be held liable for his injury.
The responding papers also state that Dlamini would have to account for his injuries, since he entered the shop’s premises at his own risk.  

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: