Occupier liability

Question 1

What is the occupiers liability Act 1957?

Answer 1

The occupier of a premises owes a duty of care to LAWFUL visitors and if this is the breached and causes damage - the visitor is entitled to compensation.

Question 2

What is the occupiers liability Act 1984?

Answer 2

The occupier of a premises owes duty of care to UNLAWFUL visitors and if this is the breached and causes damage - the visitor is entitled to compensation.

Question 3

Is occupiers liability a criminal offence?

Answer 3

No it is a civil wrong.

Question 4

What is the main remedy for a successful claim?

Answer 4

Compensation for damages/injuries.

Question 5

Who is the potential defendant?

Answer 5

The occupier of the premise who may or may not be the owner or tenant.

NO STATUTORY DEFINITION - simply follows case law

Question 6

What happened in the case of Harris v Birkenhead Corporation (1976)? (council were the occupier)

Answer 6

A 4 year old was injured in an empty house which belonged to the council. They hadn’t boarded it up and were found to be the occupiers as they had control of the premises.

Question 7

Name a case where there was no occupier.

Answer 7

Bailey v Armes (1999)

A young boy lived above a shop with his family and he took his friend to the roof to play. During this the boy was injured but the shop owners and the family were not liable as occupiers as neither had sufficient control over the roof.

Question 8

What is included as being premises?

Answer 8

Houses, buildings, vehicles and a ladder etc.

Question 9

Who is included in LAWFUL ADULT visitors?

Answer 9

1. Invitees - invited to the premise
2. Licensees - permission to be on land for particular period
3. Contractual permission - e.g. purchased ticket to event
4. Statutory right - e.g. police exercising warrant

Question 10

The visitor is owed a duty of care, how safe does the occupier have to make them?

Answer 10

Reasonably safe.

Question 11

Name a case where the occupier wasn’t liable as they had taken reasonable steps for the lawful visitors safety.

Answer 11

Laverton v Kiapasha Takeaway Supreme (2002)

The occupier fitted slip resistant tiles and mopped when rain had gotten into the shop. The claimant slipped and broke her ankle but the owner wasn’t liable as they had taken reasonable steps.

Question 12

What happens if a lawful visitor exceeds their permission?

Answer 12

They will be trespassers and will no longer be protected by the 1957 act.

Question 13

How does duty of care change for LAWFUL CHILDREN visitors?

Answer 13

They are still owed a duty of care but it includes a special duty.

Question 14

What does s2(3) say about LAWFUL CHILDREN visitors?

Answer 14

The occupier must take reasonable precautions to keep a child safe as they are less careful then adults.

Question 15

Name a case where an allurement caused a LAWFUL CHILD visitor damage/injury.

Answer 15

Glasgow Corporation v Taylor (1922)

A child ate poisonous berries in a public park and died. The council were liable as they knew it was an allurement.

Question 16

What are LAWFUL trades people expected to know?

Answer 16

They are expected to protect themselves against dangers they should reasonably know about.

Question 17

What happen if an independent contractor injures a visitor?

Answer 17

There are 3 requirements must be satisfied for the liability to be transferred to the contractor.
1. It must have been reasonable to give the work to the independent contractor rather then a specialist.
2. They must be competent to carry out the work.
3. Occupier must check the work was done properly.

Question 18

What are the 3 defences to a claim by a LAWFUL visitor and are they complete or partial?

Answer 18

1.contributory negligence - partial defence
2. consent - complete defence
3. warning notices (oral or written) - complete defence - may need to include barriers etc. if extreme danger

Question 19

What is the remedy if the occupier is liable for 1957?

Answer 19

Court can award damages for personal injury or property damaged.

Question 20

Who is a trespasser?

Answer 20

A person who has no permission to be on the occupiers premise OR a lawful visitor who extended their permissions.

Question 21

What does the 1984 act provide compensation for?

Answer 21

Personal injury only NOT damage to property.

Question 22

What factors are considered in 1984 act?

Answer 22

nature of premises, degree of danger, practicality of taking precautions and the age of the child.

Question 23

When would the occupier not be liable for a UNLAWFUL ADULT visitor + name a case.

Answer 23

When the trespasser is injured by an obvious danger.

Ratcliff v McConnell (1999)
The claimant suffered a head injury after jumping from the roof into the school pool. The defendant wasn’t liable as the risk was obvious.

Question 24

Does an occupier have to spend plenty of money to make their premises safe + name a case.

Answer 24

No

Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council (2003)
The council posted warning signs that a lake shouldn’t be swam in as it was dangerous and planned to block it off but didn’t have the funds. A 18 year old boy swam in lake, hit his head and became paralysed. The council weren’t liable as the risk only arose due to the claimants actions.

Question 25

Can an occupier be liable under 1984 if they’re unaware of the danger? Name a case.

Answer 25

No they won’t be liable.

Rhind v Astbury Water Park (2004)
The defendant was unaware there were objects within his lake. The claimant ignored signs stating not to swim and were injured by the objects. The occupier wasn’t liable.

Question 26

Are CHILD TRESPASSERS treated the same as ADULT TRESPASSERS?

Answer 26

Yes, judges will treat them the same.

Question 27

What are the 3 defences to a TRESPASSER claim?

Answer 27

1. contributory negligence - can reduce damages payable
2. consent
3. warning sign mainly for ADULT trespassers