Question

Principle: A property owner is responsible for maintaining the safety of their premises and is liable for any injuries that occur due to hazardous conditions in the premises, unless the injured party was trespassing.
Facts: Tara owns a retail store, and a heavy rainstorm caused a leak in the ceiling of the store. Tara was aware of the leak but did not have time to fix it before customers arrived the next morning. She placed a sign warning customers of the wet floor.
However, Aman, who entered the store to browse, slipped on the wet floor and injured his leg. Aman did not see the warning sign.
Based on the above which of the following statements is most accurate?

• A. Tara is liable for Aman’s injury since the wet floor was a hazardous condition
• B. Tara is not liable because she placed a warning sign, informing customers of the hazard
• C. Aman is not entitled to compensation because he failed to notice the sign
• D. Tara is not liable since the injury occurred due to a natural event beyond her control

Answer 1

Answer: (C)

Aman is not entitled to compensation because he failed to notice the sign

Answer 2

Although Tara placed a warning sign, the wet floor was still a hazardous condition on her premises. The fact that Aman did not notice the sign does not absolve Tara from liability, as she is responsible for maintaining safe conditions and for ensuring that hazards are clearly communicated. The sign alone does not negate her responsibility to ensure safety.