Introduction
In this case we learn that the plaintiff was a successful business woman as she was employed by Musgrave’s wholesalers and she oversaw improving communications between the various offices and warehouses. We see how in 2004 the plaintiff left Musgrave’s and pursued a successful career in horses and horse breeding with her husband.
The plaintiff also was fit and healthy up until this accident as she played sport from a young age, gave birth to two girls, participated in a fun triathlon, went for daily walks and rode horses.
Being a mother, the plaintiff was depended on by her two daughters she also was depended on by her husband to help on the stud farm and also had to fulfil her duties as a part-time receptionist/secretary in the local GPs’. …show more content…
Under the occupiers Liability Act 1995 persons (entrants) who come onto another person’s premises are divided into three sections:
1) Visitors, which is generally defined as a person who has the invitation or permission of the occupier to be on the premises. The occupier owes a duty of ‘reasonable’ care to a visitor. Case Law = Duffy v Carnabane.
2) Recreational Users, entrant who is present on the premises for the purpose of engaging in recreational activity in the open air. (e.g. visitors to sites, monuments, hill walkers etc.)
3) Trespassers, is defined as an entrant other than a visitor or recreational user. The Act groups recreational users with trespassers and accords them a much lower standard of care than visitors. As a result of this an occupier owes a duty towards a recreational user of the premises or a trespasser. a) not to injure the person or damage the property of the person
In this case we learn that the plaintiff was a successful business woman as she was employed by Musgrave’s wholesalers and she oversaw improving communications between the various offices and warehouses. We see how in 2004 the plaintiff left Musgrave’s and pursued a successful career in horses and horse breeding with her husband.
The plaintiff also was fit and healthy up until this accident as she played sport from a young age, gave birth to two girls, participated in a fun triathlon, went for daily walks and rode horses.
Being a mother, the plaintiff was depended on by her two daughters she also was depended on by her husband to help on the stud farm and also had to fulfil her duties as a part-time receptionist/secretary in the local GPs’. …show more content…
Under the occupiers Liability Act 1995 persons (entrants) who come onto another person’s premises are divided into three sections:
1) Visitors, which is generally defined as a person who has the invitation or permission of the occupier to be on the premises. The occupier owes a duty of ‘reasonable’ care to a visitor. Case Law = Duffy v Carnabane.
2) Recreational Users, entrant who is present on the premises for the purpose of engaging in recreational activity in the open air. (e.g. visitors to sites, monuments, hill walkers etc.)
3) Trespassers, is defined as an entrant other than a visitor or recreational user. The Act groups recreational users with trespassers and accords them a much lower standard of care than visitors. As a result of this an occupier owes a duty towards a recreational user of the premises or a trespasser. a) not to injure the person or damage the property of the person