€40k for escalator fall lost on appeal

A €40,000 award for injuries a woman received when she fell on a Dublin Airport escalator has been overturned by the Court of Appeal.

Elizabeth Lavin, aged 69, of Blackhall, Calverstown, Kilcullen, Co Kildare, has already received a part payment of €25,000 from the Dublin Airport Authority, which was the basis on which the DAA was permitted to bring an appeal against the award.

When Kieran Fleck, counsel for the DAA, raised the matter of the part payment with the appeal court, Mr Justice Michael Peart said it appeared the court had no function in that regard and it may have to be brought back before the High Court.

He also said it “may be possible for the parties to come to some mutual arrangement”. The judge made the comments when he put back the question of costs of the case to another day.

Ms Lavin lost her balance and fell on the escalator to departures in Terminal 2 on November 2, 2011. She received what the court described as a “nasty” injury to her head and other soft tissue injuries.

The appeal court said CCTV footage showed her left hand was not gripping the handrail and she was holding what appeared to be her boarding card.

The footage made clear that when she turned around to adjust her carry-on bag in some way, she fell over and fell down the escalator. A member of the public pushed the emergency button halting the escalator.

The High Court’s Mr Justice Michael Hanna, in April 2015, awarded her €60,000, but found one third contributory negligence, bringing the award to €40,000.

A three-judge appeal court said it could not agree.

Mr Justice Peart said the sole basis for the finding of negligence was that the defendant failed to bring to Ms Lavin’s attention, by adequate signage, that she could have taken one of the lifts rather than the escalator.

The judge said the lifts are in the immediate vicinity of the escalator and clearly visible because they are behind a feature blue transparent glass wall.

Mr Justice Peart said the duty of care the owner/occupier has is restricted to taking all reasonable steps to avoid injury which is known to exist or which ought to be known to exist. It was a duty prevent damage from “unusual danger”.

It cannot be said the escalator presented an unusual danger, such that there was an obligation to warn someone of any particular danger in using it, beyond providing normal signage, he said.

“Indeed, its is only common sense that on a moving escalator, the person would use the handrail to take reasonable care for her own safety,” he said.