Occupiers Liability Act 1957 Flashcards
LAWFUL VISITORS (9 cards)
Definition of OLA 1957
C may claim as a lawful visitor under the Occupiers Liability Act 1957. A lv can claim for personal injury and property damage.
Stage 1 of OLA 1957
(Occupier, Premises)
Under S.2(1), the occupier owes a ‘common duty of care’ to visitors.
Occupier - Usually the owner or tenant.
Lord Denning established the ‘sufficient control test’, which states ‘wherever a person has a sufficient degree of control over premises that they ought to realise that any failure on their part to use care may result in injury to that person’.
Wheat v Lacon stated there can be multiple occupiers of the same premises.
Premises - S.1(3)(a) states premises are ‘any fixed or moveable structure, including any vessel, vehicle or aircraft.’
Stage 1 of OLA 1957 Part 2:
(Visitor, Common Duty of Care)
Visitor - Anyone invited or permitted to be on the land - this can be expressed or implied.
Common Duty of Care - Under S.2(2), an occupier has a ‘duty to take reasonable steps to ensure the visitor will be reasonable safe in using the premises for the purpose for which he is invited or permitted to be there’.
The injuries must be due to the state of the premises, not the activities of the visitor (Darby v National Trust).
Stage 2 of OLA 1957
Did the O breach their duty?
They must have acted reasonably - if they ‘did something the reasonable man wouldn’t do, or not doing something the reasonable man would do’, then they breached their duty.
The duty is only owed in respect to the purpose the visitor is permitted to be on the premises.
Specific Circumstances under OLA 1957: Children
Children - S.2(3)(a), an occupier must be prepared for children to be less careful than adults.
- Children may not see the dangers or appreciate risks, so the O has a higher duty of care.
- Courts will consider the age and understanding of the child (Jolley v London Borough of Sutton).
Side Rules: Allurements (Glasgow Corporation v Taylor).
Side Rule: Parental Supervision (Phipps v Rochester Corporation).
Specific Circumstances under OLA 1957: Experts
Experts - S.2(3)(b) - The law states experts should look after themselves.
An occupier may expect that an expert will ‘appreciate and guard against risks in the exercise of their calling’ (Roles v Nathan).
Specific Circumstances under OLA 1957: Independant Contractors
Independent Contractors - Under S.2(4)(b), the O may be liable for the loss or injuries suffered by visitors when the cause of the damage is due to the negligence of an IC hired by the O - the responsibility can be passed to the IC.
3 Conditions must be satisfied:
1) It must be reasonable for O to have entrusted the work to the IC - Relied on their skill and expertise (Haseldine v Daw).
2) O must have takes reasonable steps to ensure the contractor was competent (Bottomley v Todmorden Cricket Club).
3) Did the O check the work was proper done. Haseldine v Daw stated if the work was of a complex nature, it is less reasonable to impose this on the O, and they have less to do to make sure the task is done.
Defences of OLA 1957
Warning Signs - Under S.1(5), Occupiers can discharge their duty if they used an effective warning sign. The warning must be sufficient to enable the visitor to be reasonably safe. Cotton v Derbyshire Council stated there is no obligation to give warning to obvious dangers.
Consent - An occupier is not liable for any damage or harm that occurs when the visitor willingly accepts the risks.
Contributory Negligence - Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1957, If the LV is partly responsible, then their damages may be reduced accordingly.
Exclusion Clause - Under S.2(1) OLA 1957, O can restrict, modify or exclude liability.
Remedies for OLA 1957
A Lawful visitor can claim compensatory damages for personal injury and property damage.
