This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/england/london/7408606.stm

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Florist loses appeal in petal row Florist loses appeal in petal row
(about 2 hours later)
A station florist found negligent after a commuter slipped and injured himself on a petal has lost its bid to appeal against the decision. A station florist found negligent after a commuter slipped on a petal and injured himself has lost its bid to appeal against the decision.
Chiltern Flowers at Marylebone Station, central London, was told to pay damages to Brian Piccolo last July.Chiltern Flowers at Marylebone Station, central London, was told to pay damages to Brian Piccolo last July.
Mr Piccolo, from Witham, Essex, fell forwards onto his right hand and then his right knee in March 2003.Mr Piccolo, from Witham, Essex, fell forwards onto his right hand and then his right knee in March 2003.
The amount of compensation to be paid to Mr Piccolo has not yet been assessed by the court.The amount of compensation to be paid to Mr Piccolo has not yet been assessed by the court.
'Reasonably effective''Reasonably effective'
In July, the High Court ruled the shop was negligent in failing to have a "reasonably effective and safe system for dealing with the danger of fallen petals".In July, the High Court ruled the shop was negligent in failing to have a "reasonably effective and safe system for dealing with the danger of fallen petals".
During their appeal bid, lawyers for the florist asked the Court of Appeal for permission to challenge a ruling that neither Mr Piccolo nor the shop's landlord, The Chiltern Railway Co, should bear part liability.During their appeal bid, lawyers for the florist asked the Court of Appeal for permission to challenge a ruling that neither Mr Piccolo nor the shop's landlord, The Chiltern Railway Co, should bear part liability.
But Lady Justice Smith said that although Mr Piccolo was aware of the presence of the flower display on the station concourse, there was no reason why, as he walked by, he should have been looking down at his feet in order to avoid slippery petals.But Lady Justice Smith said that although Mr Piccolo was aware of the presence of the flower display on the station concourse, there was no reason why, as he walked by, he should have been looking down at his feet in order to avoid slippery petals.
The railway company had told the flower shop in the past to keep its frontage clean and had threatened to revoke its concourse licence, the judge said.The railway company had told the flower shop in the past to keep its frontage clean and had threatened to revoke its concourse licence, the judge said.