New Era Newspaper

New Era Epaper
Icon Collap
Home / N$800 000  suit against Jet Stores dismissed

N$800 000  suit against Jet Stores dismissed

2022-09-29  Eveline de Klerk

N$800 000  suit against Jet Stores dismissed

WALVIS BAY – A Walvis Bay pensioner Martha Sabina Madisia has lost her civil case against Edgars Stores Namibia’s Jet Stores outlet in Walvis Bay after it was dismissed with cost by Judge Orben Sibeya.

Madisia sued Jet Stores Walvis Bay for pain, suffering and loss of enjoyment of amenities after she fell and injured herself on a wet floor of the shop in 2016.

 Madisia sued for N$500 000, a further N$300 000 for future medical and related expenses, as well as N$4 927 for hospital and medical-related expenses.

According to court documents, Madisia in her claim stated that on 17 June 2016, while shopping in Jet Stores, Walvis Bay, slipped and fell on a wet floor and sustained injuries to her hip, knee and shoulder. 

She claimed to have sustained injuries, more particularly pain, suffering and discomfort, emotional shock and trauma, following the fall.

However, Sibeya found that her evidence was improbable and false.

“The court found that it was not proven on a balance of probabilities that she fell in Jet Stores and sustained the injuries complained of; as a result, the plaintiff’s claim is dismissed,” the judge said in his ruling.

According to Sibeya, considering the evidence presented during the case, Madisia did not prove the floor was wet in the shop to cause her to fall and sustain injuries on which she based her claim.

Court documents also state that findings by two reputable orthopaedics showed the medical condition of the Madisia resulted from degeneration of the joints related to age.

“The court accepted their opinion that the medical condition of the plaintiff was due to the degenerative condition related to age and not the alleged fall. I further find that the plaintiff failed to prove that her medical condition resulted from the alleged fall. It is a well-beaten principle of our law that costs follow the event. No compelling reasons were placed before the court why the said principle should not be followed – neither could it be established from the evidence why such principle should be departed from,” Sibeya said.

Sibeya then dismissed Madisia’s claim against Jet Stores with cost. 

Such costs include costs of one instructing and one instructed counsel. 

The case was finalised on 16 September. 

The matter is regarded as final, and it is removed from the roll.

Madisia was represented by lawyer Rachel Mondo of Nixon Marcus Public Law Office, while Jet Stores was presented by Lovisa Ihalwa, instructed by ENSAfrica.


2022-09-29  Eveline de Klerk

Share on social media