Occupiers Liability

Question 1

What does the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 owe a lawful visitor?

Answer 1

The occupier owes a lawful visitor a common duty of care

Question 2

What do lawful adult visitors include?

Answer 2

Invitees - those invited to enter and have permission to be there
Licensees - those who have expressed or implied permission to be on the land for a specific period
Those with contractual permission or those with a statutory right of entry

Question 3

What happened in Laverton v Kiapasha Takeaway Supreme?

Answer 3

D’s owned a takeaway and cleaned the floor if it rained. The claimant slipped and broke her ankle. The Court of Appeal held the owners had taken reasonable care to ensure it’s customers were safe, so wasn’t liable.

Question 4

What does the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 say about child visitors?

Answer 4

There’s an additional special duty owed to child visitors by the occupiers - “the premises must be reasonably safe for a child of that age” , especially if an allurement is present which places a child visitor at risk of harm.

Question 5

What happened in Glasgow Corporation v Taylor?

Answer 5

A 7 year old ate poisonous berries in a park and died. The council were liable as the shrub that had the berries wasn’t fenced off and it was aware of the danger and berries were an allurement to young children.

Question 6

What happened in Phipps v Rochester Corporation?

Answer 6

A young child was injured when falling into a trench. The court decided that the council weren’t liable, as the occupier can expect parents to supervise very young children and not allow them to enter potentially unsafe places.

Question 7

What happened in Jolley v London Borough of Sutton?

Answer 7

A teenager was injured when playing on a boat on the councils land. The occupier is liable for injuries suffered by children that are reasonably foreseeable

Question 8

What can occupiers expect from their workman visitors and what’s a case to show this?

Answer 8

Occupiers can expect workmen visitors to be aware of the risks associated with their work. In Roles v Nathan, chimney sweeps died when working in a chimney. The occupiers weren’t liable, as the sweeps were warned of the danger.

Question 9

What happens when a visitor is injured by a workman’s negligent work? (torts of independent contractors)

Answer 9

Under the 1957 Act, if a visitor is injured by a workman’s negligent work, the occupier can have a defence and pass the claim onto the workman.

Question 10

What are 3 requirements of this?

Answer 10

1. It must be reasonable for the occupier to have given work to the contractor.
2. The contractor must be competent to carry out the task. The occupier should take up recommendations or check with a trade association to satisfy this requirement.
3. The occupier must check the work has been done properly. - Woodward v Mayor of Hastings - a child was injured on icy school steps after snow had been cleared off them. The occupiers were liable, as they failed to take the reasonable steps to check the work had been done properly.

Question 11

What are the defences to an occupiers liability claim under the 1957 Act?

Answer 11

Consent, contributory negligence and warning notices.

Question 12

What is the defence of contributory negligence?

Answer 12

The Law Reform Act 1945 states that any damages awarded to the claimant can be reduced according to the extent to which the claimant had contributed to their own harm, as their own behaviour fell below that of a reasonable person.

Question 13

What happened in O’Connell v Jackson?

Answer 13

The damages were reduced by 15% when the rider of a moped was injured and suffered greater injuries as he wasn’t wearing a helmet.

Question 14

What is the defence of consent? (Volenti non fit injuria)

Answer 14

It’s a full defence when the claimant accepts a voluntary assumption of the risk of harm. No injury is done to one who consents to the risk. If successful, the D won’t be liable to pay damages to the C.

Question 15

What needs to be shown for the defence of consent to succeed ?

Answer 15

Knowledge of the risk involved, exercise of free choice by the claimant and a voluntary acceptance of the risk.

Question 16

What’s a warning notice?

Answer 16

A complete defence to the claim of occupiers liability. Under the 1957 Act the warning can be oral or written. A warning is ineffective unless “ in all circumstances it was enough to enable the visitor to be reasonably safe”. In Rae v Marrs the premises was a deep pit inside a dark shed, so a warning was insufficient

Question 17

What does the Occupiers Liability Act 1984 state?

Answer 17

States a duty only applies in respect of people other than lawful visitors.

Question 18

What injuries does the 1984 Act provide compensation for?

Answer 18

Provides compensation for personal injuries only. Damage to property isn’t covered.

Question 19

When does the occupier owe a duty under s1(3)?

Answer 19

1. If they are aware of the danger or have reasonable grounds to believe it exists.
2. They know or have reasonable grounds to believe that the other is in the vicinity of danger or may come close to it.
3. The risk is one against which, in all circumstances, may be expected to offer the other some protection.

Question 20

What duty is imposed on occupiers under the 1984 Act?

Answer 20

There is a duty imposed on occupiers of reasonable care to ensure unlawful visitors don’t suffer injury on the premises by reason of the danger concerned.

Question 21

What happened in Ratcliff v McConnell?

Answer 21

Occupier won’t be liable if the trespasser is injured by an obvious danger. A student dived into his college swimming pool and was seriously injured when he hit his head on a ledge. The Court of Appeal decided that the occupier didn’t need to warn adult trespassers of the risk of injury against obvious dangers. It’s well known that swimming pools vary in length and diving without checking it is dangerous.

Question 22

Are child trespassers treated the same as adult tresspasers?

Answer 22

The same statutory rules apply to child visitors as for adult visitors.

Question 23

What happened in Kewon v Coventry Healthcare NHS trust?

Answer 23

An 11 year old boy fell from a fire escape on the outside of a hospital. The Court of Appeal held that since the child appreciated the danger, there was no danger due to the state of the premises, but what the boy was doing on it and the hospital wasn’t liable.

Question 24

What defences are there for the 1984 Act?

Answer 24

The same for the 1957 Act, contributory negligence, consent and a warning notice. The defence of consent is allowed under s1(6) of 1984 Act, if the trespasser appreciates the nature and degree of the risk, more than just its existence.