occupiers liability 1957 Flashcards
(11 cards)
what are the 2 statutes which set out the la on occupiers liability
occupiers liability act 1957 - for claims brought by lawful visitors
occupiers liability act 1984 - claims bought by trespassers
who is an occupier and how many can there be
an occupier is someone who has sufficient control of the premises - wheat vs lacon - manager and employees were the occupiers
can be more than one
what is a premises with case and section
under s1(3)a- premises is defined as any fixed or moveable structure
wheeler vs copas - ladder was considered a premises
what does s2(1) state
occupiers owes a duty of care to all lawful visitors meaning invitees licensees ,those with statutory right and those with contractual permission s2(1)
what does s2(2) state with case
occupiers must keep lawful visitors reasonably protected from harm - Harris vs Perry claimant was not liable for injury for bouncy castle injury as he provided supervision which was sufficient care.
s(2)3a with relevant cases
occupiers owes a higher duty of care to children -glasgow vs Taylor allurement of berries poisoned child
jolley vs Sutton - held liable as occupiers shouldn’t have underestimated the chance of 14 year old playing on a boat
Phipps vs Rochester -occupiers entitled to believe that parents will not allow their young children to go-to places potentially unsafe
s(2)3b with case
occupiers owes a lower duty of care to professionals eg roles vs Nathan - occupier not liable as chimney sweeper should’ve nown chimney was on
s(2)4 a
occupiers will not be liable if they provide reasonable warning - rae vs Mars - warning was in an unlit area and occupier was held liable
section 2(4)b
occupiers can avoid liability when hiring an independent contractor if
it was reasonable to entrust the contractor
occupiers has checked competence of contractor
occupiers checked work has been done properly unless work is too specialized
give cases for it was reasonable to entrust work of contractor
occupiers checekd competence
occupiers checked work
haseldine vs daw - reasonable to entrust work as it was highly specialised work
bottomley vs todmorden - cricket club failed to check competence because they used an unexpereicned amateur
Woodward vs Hastings - snow clearing wouldve been easy to check as its quite simple to see if steps had been cleared
finally what does s 2(1) state
when is the exception
exclusion clauses - occupiers restrict ,modify or exclude his duty by agreement or otherwise
an exclusion clause may not work depending on age of child and the ability to understand effect of the exclusion
