Cape Town - A Western Cape High Court judge has criticised a church for its failure to express “Christian qualities” such as kindness and fairness in its handling of a dispute with one of its voluntary workers.
Lorraine Marais, 79, of Crawford, was injured when she fell in the Good Hope Christian Centre in Ottery while she was ushering, carrying collection buckets.
When Marais contacted the church after receiving medical treatment and asked if it could organise a collection to help her with medical expenses, she was told: “This is a business, not a charity.”
Marais took legal action against the church, claiming it had been negligent as it had failed to ensure the stairs on which she fell were safe. There was no handrail, the stairs did not have enough traction, they were not clearly visible, and there was insufficient lighting.
The incident occurred at Easter in 2009.
On Friday, although the Western Cape High Court dismissed her case, Acting Justice Keith Enger criticised the church for its lack of Christian kindness
.
The judge commented on “an issue separate from legal liability” – that Marais had felt aggrieved that the church had not called an ambulance, that church officials had told congregants not to talk to her because of insurance issues, and that she had been told the church was a business, not a charity.
“She was doing unpaid, voluntary work to assist the defendant,” Judge Enger said.
“Whether or not the injury was caused by any fault on the part of the defendant, I would have expected a slightly more sympathetic response.
“One of the meanings of ‘Christian’ in the Concise Oxford Dictionary is ‘having qualities associated with Christians, such as kindness and fairness’. The defendant should perhaps remind itself that the word ‘Christian’ appears in its name.”
Giving his reasons for dismissing Marais’s case, Judge Enger said: “On the evidence before me, there is nothing to suggest these stairs constituted any more of a danger than any other set of stairs.
“I am unable to find the plaintiff’s fall was caused by any negligence on the part of the defendant.”
No evidence had been led that the carpets lacked traction or that the lighting had been inadequate.
A handrail, signs, or markings might have made the steps safer but, judged according to the criterion of reasonableness, the defendant was not required to take those measures, Judge Enger said.
Many ushers carrying buckets had descended the stairs in the past without incident.
Cape Times