A fall in a supermarket can happen in seconds. You notice the wet floor only after landing on it. Staff help you up, someone completes an incident form and you leave, hoping the pain will settle. Days later, you may face medical bills and time away from work.
South African personal injury law does not make a shop automatically liable whenever a customer falls. A claim generally requires proof of the relevant legal elements, including negligent conduct and a causal connection to the harm.
A 2026 Supreme Court of Appeal judgment involving Pick ’n Pay illustrates why cleaning arrangements and the evidence of what actually happened deserve close attention. It also shows why simply pointing to an outside cleaning contractor may not answer the case.
1. What the 2026 judgment concerned
On 26 January 2026, the Supreme Court of Appeal delivered judgment in Pick ’n Pay Retailers v Williams and Another, case 238/2024, reported as [2026] ZASCA 7. The matter concerned a customer’s slip and fall and the retailer’s reliance on an independent cleaning contractor.
The Court dismissed the retailer’s application for reconsideration under section 17(2)(f) of the Superior Courts Act, with costs. The procedural posture matters: the case should not be described as legislation introducing an automatic compensation scheme for shoppers.
The Court’s published summary explains that the retailer had not discharged its duty to take reasonable steps to protect customers on the facts. Outsourcing cleaning did not provide a sufficient defence in those circumstances.
See the Supreme Court of Appeal’s summary of the 2026 Pick ’n Pay judgment.
Although the judgment was delivered in January, its practical relevance continues when shoppers and retailers assess evidence about a hazard and the operation of a cleaning system.
2. Shops must take reasonable care
Courts consider whether the person responsible for premises took reasonable steps to keep them reasonably safe. The assessment depends on the risk and circumstances. It does not require a shop to prevent every conceivable accident.
Cleaning systems, inspections, staff responses and warnings may all matter. A spill that appears moments before a fall raises different questions from a dangerous area left unattended for a lengthy period.
In Checkers Supermarket v Lindsay, the Supreme Court of Appeal considered the adequacy of a cleaning system and its ability to discover and respond to dangerous spillages with reasonable promptness.
See the Checkers v Lindsay judgment on supermarket cleaning systems.
For a claimant, the question is not simply whether the floor was wet. It is what the evidence shows about the hazard, the required precautions and any failure to take them.
3. Outsourced cleaning does not end the enquiry
A shop may appoint an independent contractor to clean its premises. That can be relevant to whether reasonable steps were taken, but the existence of the contract alone does not settle liability.
The actual arrangements matter: what the contractor was expected to do, how the system operated and whether the responsible parties responded to problems. The 2026 judgment should be understood in that factual setting.
Do not assume every retailer is responsible for every cleaner’s mistake in the same way. Nor should a customer abandon a potential claim merely because a manager says cleaning is “another company’s responsibility”.
An attorney needs to identify the correct parties and the legal basis of the claim. The business name on the storefront may differ from the entity operating the shop or managing the premises. Keep information identifying the location and operator.
4. Get medical attention and document the incident
Attend to your health first. If you are injured, seek appropriate medical assessment. Do not try to finish shopping or minimise symptoms solely because the incident seems embarrassing.
Report the fall to the manager and ask that an incident report be completed. Provide an accurate account without guessing at facts you did not observe. Ask for a copy or reference number.
If it is safe and practical, take photographs showing the location, surface and any visible hazard. Include the wider area so the position of the hazard can be understood, rather than only a closeup of a patch of water.
Useful information includes:
- The date, time and exact location.
- The apparent cause and visible warning signs.
- Names and contact details of witnesses.
- Staff involved and the incident reference.
- Photographs of the area and relevant injuries.
- Medical records and proof of related expenses.
Do not manufacture evidence or ask a witness to confirm something they did not see. A reliable record is more useful than a stronger sounding account that cannot be supported.
5. Ask promptly for footage to be preserved
Security footage may show the hazard, staff activity and the fall. It may also be routinely overwritten. Make a written request promptly for relevant footage and other incident records to be preserved.
Identify the time, location and a reasonable period around the incident. A request for every camera’s footage over several days may be less practical than a focused preservation request.
Preservation and access are separate questions. The shop may need to consider privacy and the applicable access process before releasing footage. A refusal to send it immediately does not necessarily mean it never existed.
Keep the preservation request and response. If a claim is likely, an attorney can address the appropriate route for obtaining material. Do not assume that footage will remain available while you wait several months to decide.
6. Connect the injury and loss to the incident
A damages claim needs evidence of the harm and its connection to the event. Medical records can help establish what was diagnosed, the treatment and the progress of recovery.
Keep invoices, travel records relevant to treatment and information about missed work. If you claim lost income, you will need a reliable basis for the amount. A general estimate of what you “could have earned” may require further support.
Tell your treating practitioner about the incident accurately, including relevant previous conditions. Concealing an earlier injury can undermine the assessment and later claim.
Future treatment or loss may require expert evidence. An attorney can explain what reports are needed and whether the potential claim justifies the associated expense. A painful incident is not necessarily a high value claim, and a seemingly modest injury can sometimes have more serious consequences.
7. Your own conduct may also be considered
The court may examine whether the claimant’s conduct contributed to the injury. That assessment depends on the evidence and applicable law. A claimant’s fault can affect recovery without automatically eliminating every claim.
A warning sign matters, but its existence does not necessarily settle the case. Its visibility, position and adequacy may need examination. Similarly, a shopper’s attention to displayed goods is part of the real setting in which safety is assessed.
Give your attorney the complete account, including footwear, warnings and anything distracting you. An honest explanation allows the risks to be assessed early rather than emerging unexpectedly during litigation.
8. Do not leave legal advice until the last moment
Prescription can extinguish a claim if action is not taken in time. Many ordinary damages claims fall within a three year framework, but the starting point and exceptions require assessment. Claims involving public bodies or other statutory schemes can have additional requirements.
See the Prescription Act.
Reporting the fall or exchanging emails with the shop should not be assumed to interrupt prescription. Obtain advice promptly, particularly if injuries persist or the business disputes responsibility.
Preserve the facts before they disappear
A shop injury claim is strongest when the evidence explains the hazard, the precautions and the resulting harm. The 2026 judgment reinforces the need to examine actual safety arrangements rather than accepting a general statement about outsourcing.
Seek treatment, record the incident and preserve relevant material. Those steps allow you to assess the claim on evidence while it is still available.
