If you’ve experienced a trip and fall on someone else’s property, you may expect the path to compensation to be straightforward. However, property owners sometimes use unexpected or unconventional arguments to avoid liability. Understanding these tactics is essential when pursuing a personal injury claim under Ontario law.
Challenging Causation: When Owners Blame Nature or Others
Ontario’s Occupiers’ Liability Act outlines a property owner’s duty to keep their premises safe. But proving that negligence directly caused your fall isn’t always simple. Some owners may turn to the following defenses:
- Natural Forces Defense: Property owners might claim the hazard was due to a natural, unforeseeable event—such as a sudden storm or strong wind—beyond their control. This defense only works if they can show they took reasonable steps to prepare for such possibilities.
- Third-Party Blame: Some may argue that someone else, like a delivery person or another visitor, caused the hazard. For example, a spill on the floor moments before your fall could be blamed on a customer. In these cases, owners must also show they had systems in place to detect and address such hazards quickly.
Shared Fault: The Strategy of Contributory Negligence
Ontario courts often assess shared responsibility in accidents. This allows a property owner to argue that the injured person contributed to their own fall. Common examples include:
- Distracted Walking: Owners may say you were looking at your phone or otherwise distracted and failed to notice an obvious hazard.
- Footwear Factors: They might claim your choice of footwear—such as sandals or high heels—made a fall more likely, especially on slippery surfaces.
While these arguments may reduce the amount of compensation, they don’t automatically remove liability. Courts will consider whether the hazard was dangerous regardless of distraction or footwear.
Questioning Maintenance Practices
Some owners rely on arguments related to cleaning and property upkeep:
- Recently Cleaned Area: They may state the floor was cleaned just before the incident and warning signs were in place—or claim the hazard hadn’t yet been noticed.
- Lack of Records: If asked for maintenance logs, owners might argue it’s not feasible to keep perfect records in busy locations. However, the court will expect proof of a general, ongoing effort to monitor and maintain safety.
Strengthening Your Case: What You Can Do
Understanding these potential defenses allows you to prepare more effectively. To support your claim, consider the following actions:
- Take detailed photographs of the scene, including the hazard and any warning signs—or lack thereof
- Gather witness statements from anyone who saw the fall or the surrounding conditions
- Consult a personal injury lawyer with experience in trip and fall claims to help you counter these arguments and build a compelling case
Don’t Be Deterred by a Denial
A property owner’s denial doesn’t mean you’re out of options. With strong evidence and the right legal support, you can challenge unconventional defenses and hold the responsible party accountable for maintaining safe premises.