Sintes v Tower Hamlets LBC [2026] EWCA Civ 752: The Claimant goes to market and comes back empty-handed - Maia Cohen, Temple Garden Chambers
14/08/26. The Court of Appeal overturned the judgment of the lower court and held that, as per the general rule in Tindall v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police [2024] UKSC 33, public authorities do not have a common law duty to protect others from a harm it does not create.
Factual Background
Ms Sintes was walking along a public footpath next to Whitechapel market when she tripped and fell over a number of metal poles left on the path and fractured her ankle. The poles were the components of market stalls, presumed to have been left by an unidentified market trader in breach of the terms of their trading licence.
Ms Sintes brought claims in nuisance and negligence against Tower Hamlets, the Licensing Authority for the market traders under the London Local Authorities Act 1990.
Judgment in the first instance
In the first instance, the DDJ found for Ms Sintes. Relying on the Tower Hamlets’ 2017 Standard Operating Procedures and Processes for Market Officers (the “SOPP”), which made provisions for Market Officers to supervise and enforce licence conditions, he found Tower Hamlets exercised a level of control over the management of the market.
Consequently, he found Tower Hamlets were responsible for ensuring the market was managed and run in a way that did not create a public nuisance on the adjacent footpath, and/or that Tower Hamlets owed Ms Sintes, as a user of the adjacent footpath, a duty of care not to run or allow the market to be run in such a way as to create a hazard.
Appeal
On Appeal, the Court of Appeal held that the starting point was the general rule in Tindall v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police, namely that “a person has no common law duty to protect another person from harm or to take care to do so: liability can generally arise only if a person acts in a way which makes another worse off as a result” and that the liability of public authorities in the tort of negligence is governed by the same principles that apply to private individuals. The Claimant’s complaint amounted to the...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/georgeclerk
![Appeal judge rules that credit hire company has no costs liability following a finding of fundamental dishonesty in personal injury case: RSA v. Fastrack Solutions Limited [2023] 4 WLUK 92 - David Bowden, Erimus Chambers](/content/images/resized/images/stories/carkeys_72_72.jpg)
