Once a plaintiff leads evidence of steps that could have been taken to obviate a risk of injury, the evidentiary onus shifts to the defendant occupier to prove those steps were not reasonable. An appellate court should endeavour to reconcile apparently inconsistent statements in a trial judge's reasons before concluding they are in fact inconsistent. A pedestrian's tripping on a concealed hazard may amount to mere inadvertence that does not constitute contributory negligence where the occupier has failed to warn of the hazard.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 8 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 8 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.