Woman tries to sue Woolworths for $237,000 after being hit with a trolley

A woman who claims she was “neglectfully” left after being hit by a Woolworths trolley tried to sue the supermarket giant for a whopping amount.

A woman tried to sue the supermarket after being hit by one of their trolleys. Picture: Sam Mooy

A woman who claims she was bumped by a Woolworths shopping trolley and “left neglectfully” has been smacked down by a judge after trying to sue the supermarket giant.

Gila Golda Rosily was shopping at Woolworths in the Brisbane suburb of Jimboomba on December 30, 2015 when she claims one of its staff members hit her with a trolley.

Almost a year later, on December 6, 2016, Ms Rosily filed a statement of claim, seeking a whopping $237,500 in damages from the supermarket.

“On the 30th December, 2015 I was assulted (sic) by a hit to my spine befront (sic) of the Woolworths staff member while conducting the conversation of the product in search at the Jimboomba store shoping (sic) centre,” her affidavit read.

“I was left neglectfuly (sic) so self emergency to my doctor whom came and treat me on the premises. Ambulance called to take me to hospital my son an (sic) his girlfriend were called to assist. Staff member could have avoid this by directions to me instant pain to my back am on the treatment plan.”

Ms Rosily claimed the trolley hit left her with pain to her back and put her in hospital.

Woolworths was sued for a whopping $237,000. Picture: Robert Pozo/AAP

On November 29, 2017, Ms Rosily and Woolworths finally faced off at a hearing where the judge quickly dismissed her claim. She was also ordered to pay Woolworths’ costs.

But, according to court documents published last week, Ms Rosily did not cop the loss.

Instead, she tried to appeal the decision through Queensland’s Court of Appeal — but her time to take Woolworths back to court expired in late December 2017.

Court documents stated Ms Rosily did not explain her delay in filing the appeal, why she delayed seeking an extension of time or even if her appeal would “have any merit”.

All Ms Rosily was able to put forward as an explanation was that she was “unable to be present at the proceedings of the Primary Court as she was still in hospital as a result of the incident”.

But the Court of Appeal quickly struck that excuse down.

“That is not correct,” the court said. “Because the transcript of the proceedings of 29 November 2017 shows that the applicant was present and took part fully in argument.

“To seek an extension of time within which to appeal upon a patently false basis is vexatious, and, for that reason, the application for an extension of time should be struck out.”

The Court of Appeal struck out Ms Rosily’s final bid in August, again ordering her to pay Woolworths’ costs.