• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

Card Range To Study

through

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/10

Click to flip

Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;

Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;

H to show hint;

A reads text to speech;

10 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back

ACts

OLA 57 and OLA 84


Unfair contract terms act 77


defective premises act 72

OLA 57

lawful visitors




occupier is who has control


more than one person can have control (Wheat v Lacon 1966)




law vis:


invitees


licensees


right at law (e.g police)


courts may be prepared to ungrade a child trespasser as a visitor (Glasgow Corp v Taylor 1922)


s2(2) OLA 57 common duty of care


Laverton v Kiapisha 02 all was reasonably expected, couldn't mop and dry all night




Children s2(3)a occupier can expect a child to take less care for his own safety than an adult, unless so young that parents expected to exercise control


Phipps v Rochester corp 55 child 5 yr old injured in care of 7 yr old sister


Jolley v Sutton lbc 2000 older minors attracted to a interesting part, less predictable than that of a younger child 2 14 yr olds canal boat

Skilled contracters

s2(3)b ola 57 if risk is associated with the work done it is fine Roles v Nathan 63 chimney sweeps CO poisonin, if would affect normal visitors then no protection,


salmon Seafarers resteraunts 83 firemen reasonable steps to contain neg started fire sustain injuries - need to provide required standard of care


warnings


s2(4)a warning doesn't absolve liability unless enables to be safe


darby v national trust 01 no duty to warn against obvious dangers


lough v intruder detection 08 workmen on property no guard on staircase warning 25% liable

independent contractors

2(4)b gwilliam v west herts nhs trust 02 has the occupierdone enough to discharge their duty, not necessary to check contents of insurance cover



defences
volenti, s2(5) ), liability can be excluded UCTA77, not death or serious injury, must be reasonable if not
ola 84

s1(3) duty arises when aware of danger and ahs reasonable grounds to belive it exists


knows or has reasonable grounds to belive that someon may come into the vicinity


risk is one can reasonably be expected to offer some protection


death and bodily injury only (s1(8))

Cases

Ratcliff v McConnell and another 99 trespasser dives into swimming pool at night, volenti


Tomilson v Congleton BC 03 young dived into lake, had started to cover area with plants to dischourage, found in favour of claimant should have all been covered


young v Kent CC 05 fell through skylight, evidence of done before


revill v newberyy 96 shot gun through hole in door wounding trespasser




s1(4) must take reasonable care- objective test - age of c, nature of entire, precautions necessary to guard against risk

Defences

warnings and exclusions of liability


s1(5) ola 84 can be discharged- age of entrant is important


volenti s1(6)

vendors, lesssors and local authorities

landlord has obligation to tenant


builder required to ensure building work in dwelling is done properly DPA 72




?? something about councils?