Occupier's Liability

Question 1

Jolley V Sutton London Council 2000

1957 Act

Answer 1

S1(3) premises= “any fixed or moveable structure including vessel, vehicle or aircraft”

Abandoned boat fell on 14 year old boy as he attempted to repair the structure

Includes buildings, fire escapes, driveways, scaffolding and abandoned boats

Question 2

Simkiss v Rhonda Borough Council 1983

1957 Act

Answer 2

S2(3)A)) occupiers must must know children will be less careful than adults and therefore hold a higher standard of care

Child was playing on a steep bank and was injured- the father didn’t think it was dangerous.

It would be unfair to hold the Council at a higher standard than the parents. Occupier is to assume the parents will take reasonable care.

Question 3

1984 Act- conditions of a non-visitor

Answer 3

1. The occupier is aware of the danger of has reasonable grounds to believe it exists
2. The occupier knows/has reasonable grounds to believe someone is or may come into the vicinity of the danger
3. The risk is one against which, in all circumstances, he may be reasonably expected to offer the non visitor protection

Question 4

1. OCCUPIER

Answer 4

S1(2) of the Act states the occupier is the person who has, or is able to exercise a sufficient degree of control over the premises.

Question 5

2. VISITOR

Answer 5

An occupier owes a duty under S1(2) of the 1957 act to those they have invited or have given permission to enter or use the premises.

Question 6

3. PREMISES

Answer 6

S1(3) of 1957 Act “any fixed or moveable structure, including any vessel, vehicle or aircraft”

Question 7

4. DANGEROUS ACTIVITY

&the duty of care

Answer 7

“A duty to take such care as in all the circumstances is reasonable to see that the visitor will be reasonably safe in using the premises for the purposes of which he is invited”

Question 8

Kiapasha v Laverton 2002

Answer 8

An occupier does not guarantee the safety of its visitors.

They took all reasonable steps by having slip resistant tiles, a mopping system and a foot mat.

Question 9

Pollock v Cahill 2015

Answer 9

Mr Pollock is a blind man who fell out of a window that was left open by Cahill.

Claim was successful as they created the risk and should of told him. The occupier must have regards for any known vulnerabilities

Question 10

Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council 2003

Answer 10

Hit his head at the bottom of a lake in a public place after ignoring a sign saying “Dangerous Water: No Swimming”

Claim failed as Tomlinson is a person of full capacity who voluntarily and without any pressure engaged in the activity.

1984 ACT