Boy's payout from shoeshop injury

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7824418.stm

Version 0 of 1.

An 11-year-old boy has been awarded £1,800 damages after being injured while trying on shoes in a sportswear shop in Edinburgh.

The boy, who cannot be identified, was trying on trainers at a branch of JJB Sports in Edinburgh when he was struck by a drawer on a stock trolley.

He suffered a cut and his shirt was torn at Fort Kinnaird Park in March 2007, which has left him with a scar.

His mother, from Musselburgh, sued the sportswear giant on his behalf.

She claimed against the company over its duty of care to prevent accidents.

The court heard the boy had sat down on a seat to try on shoes but could not get his heel in so had stood up, turned round and bent over to sort the problem. Given that he was working in an area where customers were present it was incumbent upon him and his employers to avoid injury to customers Sheriff Frank Crowe A member of staff pricing shoes at a mobile stock trolley nearby opened a drawer, and the bottom corner struck the boy on the back causing him to scream.

Lawyers for the company claimed the accident was caused by the boy's own carelessness and argued it was not foreseeable that the metal trolley - likened to a filing cabinet - would cause injury.

But they accepted the employee had failed to properly look out for customers and children and had not been given training on how to use the trolley.

In his evidence, the employee told the court he thought it had been safe to open the drawer as the boy had been three or four feet away but had jumped up and backwards on to the drawer.

The child's mother had originally been seeking £6,000 for her son's personal injury but the lower figure was later agreed.

'Glancing blow'

The case was heard at Edinburgh Sheriff Court by Sheriff Frank Crowe, QC, who awarded £1,800 to the boy for his pain and suffering.

In a written judgement, Sheriff Crowe said: "We are all aware of a shop's need to re-stock shelves during business hours when trading has been busy.

"On the evidence it seems likely that (the member of staff) who appeared a conscientious employee was engrossed in what he was doing and failed to properly account for (the boy's) presence near him trying on shoes.

"The description of the injury and resultant scar indicate that (the boy) was struck on the lower left side of his back just before he got up from bending down to try on shoes.

"The impact was more of a glancing blow and while undoubtedly painful was the result of momentary carelessness.

"(The employee) very fairly conceded he probably opened the drawer when (the boy) had been bending down.

"Given that he was working in an area where customers were present it was incumbent upon him and his employers to avoid injury to customers when working with the trolley/cabinet," he added.