Occupiers Liability

Front 1

what is occupiers liability?

Back 1

the liability of an occupier for damage done to visitors on the premesis

Front 2

Occupiers liability Act 1957

Back 2

Liability to visitors

Front 3

Occupiers liability Act 1984

Back 3

Liability to trespassers

Front 4

1957 Act S.1(1)provides that the Act is designed to:

Back 4

….regulatetheduty which an occupier of premises owes to his visitors in respect of dangersdue the state of the premises or to things done or omitted to be done on them

Front 5

Test of occupiers liability is

Back 5

•OccupationalControl Test •Where a person has a sufficientdegree of control over the premises then they will owe a duty of care to thoselawfully on the premises.

Front 6

wheat v lacon& Co Ltd

Back 6

Claimant and family stayed at an open house. Stairs were steep, rail stopped 2 steps from the bottom and there was no light. Husband fell and died. It was held that owners and managers were occupiers and were both liable

Front 7

Harris v Birkenhead Corporation

Back 7

4 year old wandered from play park into derilict house that was subject to compulsory purchase by the council. The house was not locked or secured. Tenant decided she did not take up offer of accommodation. Child fell from window and suffered injury. Held: council had legal right to take possession of the house and so the council was liable

Front 8

Who are visitors?

Back 8

...The persons who would at common law be treated as... invitees or licensees

Front 9

who can be a visitor according to the 1957 act?

Back 9

•Express Permission

•Operation of Law.

Implied Permission

Front 10

What happens if permission is abused ?

Back 10

May amount to trespass and occupier may not be liable

Front 11

Darby v national trust

Back 11

Husband drowned in a pond, held that defendant owed no risk as the risk to swimmers was obvious

Front 12

S.2(2)The 1957Act imposes a “common duty of care”upon occupiers “

Back 12

...to takesuch care as in all the circumstances of the case is reasonable to see that thevisitor will be reasonably safe in using the premises for which he is invitedor permitted by the occupier to be there.This means that the visitors must be madesafe not the premises.

Front 13

S.2(3)(a) ofthe 1957 Act provides that an occupier must be prepared forchildren to be less careful than adults

Back 13

Taylor v Glasgow corp- Child ate some berries from a shrub in D's botanical park. berries poisoned the boy and he died. No warnings or fences to keep people away from shrub. D was held liable as the berries were alluring to children and there was nothing to deffer them from eating from it.

Front 14

jolley v sutton

Back 14

Boys , 14 found an abandon boat and started working on it. sign was put up to say not to touch the boat and counsel was supposed to take it away but they never did. One of the Boys suffered spinal injuries.

Front 15

Phipps v Rochester

Back 15

5 year old and 7 year old walking unaccompanied. while walking 5 year old fell into a trench. Devlin J: one is supposed to take responsibility for their children. one cannot shift this responsibility to the occupier of land.

Front 16

what does the 1957 act say about skilled visitors

Back 16

an occupier may expect that a person, in the exercise of his calling, willappreciate and guard against any special risks ordinarily incident to it, sofar as the occupier leaves him free to do so.

Front 17

Roles v. Natham

Back 17

C employed as chimeny sweepers however working environment became dangerous due to carbon monoxide. they were warned of the danger, they said they were aware. Engeineer forcibly removed them, however they went back and were found dead. Defendant was not held liable. their special skills meant they were aware of the risks and if they had heeded warnings they would have been safe.

Front 18

S.2(4)(a) ofthe 1957 Act provides that

Back 18

where damage is caused to a visitor by a danger of which he had been warnedby the occupier, the warning is not to be treated without more as absolving theoccupier from liability, unless in all the circumstances it was enough toenable the visitor to be reasonably safe

Front 19

Under s1(3) of the 1984 Act when will the occupier owe duty to trespassers?

Back 19

a)he is aware of the danger, or should reasonably have known it existed, on hispremises; and

(b)he knows, or has reasonable grounds to believe, the trespasser is in thevicinity of the danger, or is likely to come into the vicinity; and

(c)the risk is one which considering all the facts he could reasonably be expectedto offer some protection against. m

Front 20

Tomlinson v Congleton BC

Back 20

C owned a park with many lakes. signs and rangers were put in place to stop people from swimming in them. Claimant dived into shallow water and broke his neck. Although he was trespasser, steps were taken to prevent him from swimming and so the counsel was not held liable

Front 21

Higgs v Foster

Back 21

Police officer was investigating trailer and fell into a pit. tried to make a claim as he was a trespasser, claim failed as the respondent was unaware of officers presence.

Front 22

Keown v Coventrt Healthcare NHS trust

Back 22

Child fell while climbing fire escape defendant was not liable as fire escape was not dangerous and injuries were his own fault

Front 23

what can an occupier set limits on

Back 23

Time and length of stay and purpose, restrict access to certain areas

Front 24

The calgarth case

Back 24

when you invite someone into your house to use the stairs, you do not invite them to slide down the banister

-Scrutton LJ

Front 25

Under the 84 act how can an occupier discharge duty?

Back 25

By putting up notices warning of danger on his premesis

Front 26

s1(4)The 1984 Act states that

Back 26

The Occupiers’ duty once it isestablished is totake such care is isreasonable in the case to see that the non-visitor does not suffer injury onthe premises.

Front 27

Which case defines who an occupier is?

Back 27

Wheat v Lacon

Front 28

which section of which acts provides that occupiers must be less careful than adults

Back 28

S.2(3)(a)of the 1957 act

Front 29

Duty of care is not automatica nd certain criteria must be filled before duty is owed. which section of the 84 act states this

Back 29

S1(3)

Front 30

which case concerns duty to skilled person>

Back 30

Roles nathan

Front 31

What was the allurement in Jolly sutton

Back 31

An abandoned boat

Front 32

Duty to which occupier owes visitors is to

Back 32

Ensure that the visitor is reasonably safe on the premises for the purpose intended

Front 33

which statutory provision deals with signs and warnings?

Back 33

s.2(4)(a)

Front 34

which was the case to lay out that liability was owed to trespassers?

Back 34

Tomlinson v Congleton