A recent judgement involved a woman walking through a construction site in high heels. The judgement is important for construction companies because the construction contractor in charge of the site was held partially liable for injuries she sustained. The link to the judgement is at the end of this article.

Civils 200 (Pty) Ltd did construction work at Strand Pavilion for the City of Cape Town. Mrs. Gordon was going to a party venue nearby and the parking lot where she parked was at the construction site. By walking across the parking lot, she entered the construction site and sustained serious injuries due to a fall.

The work that had been done on the site until that point was a trench excavation and installation of a pipeline. The construction contractor closed the area afterwards by filling it with sand and handed the site over to the City of Cape Town for another contractor to tar the area. The handover was said to be informal as there was no completion certificate issued.

In determining whether the company was negligent, the court had to decide whether a reasonable person in the position of the construction company would have foreseen the reasonable possibility of a person being injured and taken reasonable steps to guard against it. If so, the court enquired further, whether the construction company failed to take such steps.

The construction company alleged that since it handed over the site, it was not in control of the site and was responsible for maintenance work only from time to time. It however admitted that the site was exposed for 3 months and the compact sand would have become loose and uneven.

The court found that a person or company in control of property where a hazard exists is under a duty to warn others of the nature of the hazard and the risk involved. Since the site was not cordoned off and there were no warning signs, the construction company in this matter was negligent. The court further found that the construction company was in charge of the site because it would still do inspections from time to time.

However, the court found that Mrs. Gordon was equally to blame for walking in high heels onto a visible construction site. She also acknowledged that she may not have kept a proper lookout. Accordingly, the court held the construction company liable for only half of Mrs. Gordon’s damages.

This judgement places a notable standard of conduct on construction companies to prevent injury to the public even if it is not entirely in control of the site. To err on the side of caution construction companies can deduce that a duty to cordon off an unfinished site and place warning signs of danger would be reasonably expected conduct in most circumstances. This is even if it has handed the site over to a municipality for further work by a different contractor.

It is interesting that the plaintiff did not seek relief against the City of Cape Town who certainly has a higher duty of care to the public and was in possession of the site having regard to the handover.

Link: Gordon v Civils 2000 (Pty) Ltd (14194/2018) [2026] ZAWCHC 188 (17 March 2026)

This article does not constitute legal advice nor replace the need to seek advice. It also does not contain all the information relevant to the subject matter. Each situation is different and must be evaluated on its own merits. For advice on related matters, our contact details are below.