Dining with Res Ipsa Loquitor

In the recent case of Williams v Beyerskloof Wine Bar (Pty) Ltd (16561/20) [2025] ZAWCHC 240 (29 May 2025), the Western Cape High Court found the defendant liable for damages suffered by the plaintiff as a result of ingesting a needle like object through food served by the restaurant which became lodged in her throat.

Liability on the part of the defendant was underpinned by the principles of res ipsa loquitor.

On 3 October 2020, Ms Maxine Williams (“plaintiff”) and her husband went out to wine and dine at Beyerskloof Wine Bar (Pty) Ltd (“defendant”) which was a dining spot they frequently attended. In true dining fashion, the couple ordered a bottle of wine to drink, and each ordered a hamburger with sides to eat. During the course of  dinner the plaintiff felt some kind of uneasiness as if something was wedged in her throat. In an effort to resolve this discomfort, the plaintiff went to the bathroom and tried to relieve herself of this uncomfortable sensation but was unsuccessful. Lodging her finger down her throat for relief did not assist and instead she eventually noticed blood dripping down as she stood over the bathroom basin. The plaintiff was in a frenzy which was only exacerbated by the fact that this situation occurred during the period of COVID-19 which had the people in the restaurant paying attention to her in a suspicious manner.

The couple immediately attended to the emergency rooms at Mediclinic in order to consult a doctor. X-rays confirmed the presence of such a needle-likeobject in the plainiff’s throat. Given that she had been consuming alcohol and food, she could not be operated on, and the doctor resolved to monitor and hospitalise her for five days until the object was no longer visible on the x-rays. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant was to blame for her ingestion of a foreign object as this only occurred when she was consuming the food served by the defendant. The defendant disputed playing any role in the plaintiff’s predicament. This denial was largely on the basis of the defendant pleading that they adhere to high standard of protocols when preparing food for customers and ensuring that their ingredients are sourced from highly reputable suppliers who would not have such objects lodged in their supply. 

The court had to determine whether the defendant could be held liable for damages in these circumstances, bearing in mind that there was no direct evidence on the foreign like object finding its way into the plaintiff’s hamburger. The plaintiff’s premise for the defendant’s liability was based on the plaintiff becoming aware during her consumption of the hamburger there was a foreign like object she felt in her throat which painfully disrupted her eating and refused to pass down her throat. The only witness called on behalf of the defendant was its general manager at the time and who was not present on the night of the incident. The court noted with speculation the witness’s response in giving a possible explanation to the origins of the needle like object stating that “there must have been unforeseen circumstances for this to happen”. 

Res ipsa loquitor allows the court to infer negligence from a situation where such negligence is obvious. In applying this doctrine, the absence of a “non-negligent” and plausible  explanation by the defendant may result in a finding  in the plaintiff’s favour. In such instances, there rests an obligation on the defendant to rebut such an inference which the court found that the defendant failed to do in this case. 

Service providers are cautioned by this judgment to always take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm to its customers as this can result in liability for injuries suffered. The doctrine of res ipsa loquitor can be successfully relied in these specific circumstances and in a variety of others, particularly in relation to general liability and product liability matters.