Occupier liability for lawful visitors Flashcards
The act for lawful visitors
Occupiers Liability Act 1957
Occupier
S.1 (2) of OLA 1957
Occupier- more than one occupier of a premises
Wheat v E.Lacon + Co LTD
An occupier can be in control of the premises
Harris v Birkenhead corporation
No sufficient control means no occupier
Bailey v Armes
Exclusive occupation is not essential, may be more than one occupier
Collier v Anglian Water Authority
Premises
S.1 (3)(a) OLA 1957
Duty of care
S.2 (2) OLA 1957
Does not have to be completely safe but what is reasonable
Laverton v Kiapasha Takeaway supreme
Occupiers need to make land reasonably safe, not guarantee safety
Dean and Chapter of Rochester Cathedral v Debell
Duty cannot last forever, no constant obligation
Cole v Davis-Gilbert, The royal British legion and others
Liability for children
S.2 (3) OLA 1957
Things can act as an allurement to young children
Glasgow Corporation v Taylor
Parents shouldn’t allow young children to go to potentially unsafe places
Phipps v Rochester Corporation
Liability to people carrying out trade/calling
S.2 (3) (b) OLA 1957
Course of action and specific type of injury was not foreseeable
Jolley v London Borough of Sutton
People carrying trade must be aware of particular danger of the trade
Roles v Nathan
Independent contractor
S.2 (4) OLA 1957
Reasonable for occupier to have given work to contractor
Haseldine v Daw+son ltd
Contractor hired must be competent to do task
Bottomley v Todmorden Cricket club
Occupier must check the work has been done
Woodward v Mayor of Hastings
