A McDonald’s customer who claimed $2.15 million in damages after slipping in a restaurant has been awarded just $14,740 after a judge found he failed to take reasonable care.

In awarding the damages, ACT Supreme Court judge David Mossop noted how obvious the hazard was to customers.

Mohammad Almazaydeh visited a Canberra McDonald’s in February 2021, passing a “wet floor” warning sign.

He slipped but steadied himself on the sign, and immediately clutched his hip. He later claimed to have suffered a variety of injuries.

CCTV showed four “wet floor” signs, a worker mopping the floor and Mr Almazaydeh slipping and limping away.

The McDonald’s franchisee argued the cleaning operations were obvious.

However, Justice Mossop says the restaurant did not take all reasonable care to prevent injury.

It had warning signs around the restaurant, allowing them to be left in place while each area was cleaned, rather than them being deployed to where the work was actually being done.

This had the effect of not drawing attention to the area being cleaned.

The area affected by mopping extended beyond a warning sign by about 50cm, so it would not necessarily have been obvious that spot was wet. But McDonald’s was correct to say anybody paying reasonable attention would have seen the mopping under way.

Justice Mossop says Mr Almazaydey failed to take reasonable care. He was looking down at his wallet, which held his mobile phone, or to the side.

Although Mr Almazaydey – who represented himself – produced medical certificates and reports, the court says he did not provide expert evidence addressing whether the slip caused the injuries listed in his statement of claim.

The court accepted evidence by McDonald’s expert doctor, who said Mr Almazaydey suffered, at most, a soft tissue injury that would have resolved within weeks.

Justice Mossop says he cannot estimate economic loss as Mr Almazaydey did not produce evidence such as tax records, and had only established soft tissue injury.

He awarded $20,000 in damages plus $2000 for expenses, but subtracted 33% for contributory negligence, making a total of $14,740.

Read the judgment here.