occupiers liability 1957

Question 1

occupier

Answer 1

• someone who has sufficient control of a premises
• wheat v lacon

Question 2

two occupiers acts

Answer 2

• OLA 1957: lawful visitors
• OLA 1984: trespassers

Question 3

premises

Answer 3

• any fixed or moveable structure
• s1(3)(a) 1957 act

Question 4

lawful visitor

Answer 4

• someone who has permission to be somewhere

Question 5

two types of permission

Answer 5

• express permission
• implied permission

Question 6

express permission

Answer 6

• the occupier specifically invites the entrant onto their property

Question 7

implied permission

Answer 7

• implied invitation

Question 8

types of implied permission

Answer 8

• repeated visits
• doctrine of allurement
• statutory powers of entry

Question 9

repeated visits (IP)

Answer 9

• occupier knows people are continually visiting their land but does nothing about it
• lowery v walker

Question 10

doctrine of allurement (IP)

Answer 10

• a child will not be a trespasser if they wander onto land to investigate something which is dangerous and attractive to children
• jolly v sutton

Question 11

duty of care (1957)

Answer 11

• all visitors are automatically owed a duty of care by the occupier
• s2(2)

Question 12

breach of duty (1957)

Answer 12

• the occupier has a duty to take such care in all circumstances to see that the visitor will be reasonably safe in the premises
• s2(2)

normal negligence template

Question 13

adult visitor

Answer 13

• common DOC
• s2(2)
• cunningham v reading fc

Question 14

child visitor

Answer 14

• higher DOC
• s2(3)(a)
• glasgow corp v taylor

Question 15

very young child visitors

Answer 15

• lower DOC if they are supervised by parents
• phipps v rochester corp

Question 16

skilled visitors

Answer 16

• lower DOC if they are injured in the exercise of their calling
• s2(3)(b)
• roles v nathan

Question 17

independent contractors

Answer 17

occupier can avoid liability for injury caused to a visitor by work done by an IC if:
- it was reasonable for the occupier to entrust the work to an IC
- occupier must have taken reasonable steps to satisfy himself that the IC was competent
- occupier must have taken reasonable steps to ensure that the work had been properly done (haseldine v daw and sons)
- s2(4)(b)

Question 18

resulting damage (1957)

Answer 18

• visitors can claim for personal injury and damage to their property under s1(3)(b) OLA 1957

Question 19

defences (1957)

Answer 19

• warnings
• contributory negligence
• consent

Question 20

warnings (1957)

Answer 20

• must be ‘sufficient to enable the visitor to be reasonably safe’ (woollins v british celanese)

Question 21

contributory negligence (1957)

Answer 21

• law reform (CN) act 1945: damages are reduced according to C’s responsibility for the damage (froom v butcher)

Question 22

consent (1957)

Answer 22

• if C voluntarily takes part in potentially hazardous activities, no duty is owed by the occupier (simms v leigh rugby)

Question 23

remedies (1957)

Answer 23

• damages in the form of compensation can be claimed for personal injury or damage to property or possessions