Occupier's Liability 1957 AO1 (Eval)

Question 1

Occupier’s Liability Act 1957

Answer 1

* covers claims made by lawful visitors against the occupier, as set out WvE.LCL

Question 2

Section 1- ‘57

Answer 2

d must have either express perm (invitee/contractual perm), implied perm (licensee- LvW), delivery maker or legal right of entry

Question 3

Section 1(3)(a)- ‘57

Answer 3

d, the occupier (WvE.LCL), must be in control the premises (WvC)

Question 4

Section 2(1)- ‘57

Answer 4

d owes a common duty of care to c as an adult/child lawful visitor

Question 5

Section 2(2)- ‘57

Answer 5

d must “take such care in all circumstances… is r to see that visitor will be r safe in using the premises” (LvKTS)

Question 6

Section 2(3)(a)- ‘57

Answer 6

c is child =special DoC- PvBHW quote & GCvT allurement
-injury rf and w/o warning (JvLBS, LvYCC)

Question 7

Section 2(3)(b)- ‘57

Answer 7

expert visitor carry out work will “app and guard against any special risks ordinarily incidental to it” (RvN) x apply- rescuers (OvT)

Question 8

Section 2(4)(b)- ‘57

Answer 8

d pass liability to ind con (FvW) because c injured by their work provided:

• d took r steps to ensure z comp (BvTCC)
• r to for d to give work to z
• d check non-tec work properly done (WvMH, HvD)

Question 9

Wheat v E.Lacon and Co Ltd

Answer 9

• OLA ‘57.. against the occupier
• D is the occupier

Question 10

Lowery v Walker

Answer 10

S1, implied permission e.g licensee *

Question 11

Laverton v Kiapasha Takeaway Supreme

Answer 11

S2(2), d must “take such care in all circumstances… is r to see that visitor will be r safe in using the premises”

Question 12

Perry v Butlins Holiday World

Answer 12

S2(3)(a) child special DoC: D “must be prep for children to be less careful than adults… the p must be r safe for a child of that age”

Question 13

Glasgow Corporation v Taylor

Answer 13

S2(3)(a) child special DoC: …especially if there is an allurement

Question 14

Jolley v London Borough of Sutton

Answer 14

C’s injuries must be reasonably foreseeable

Question 15

Liddle v Yorkshire CC

Answer 15

…rf and without warning

Question 16

Roles v Nathan

Answer 16

S2(3)(b), expert visitor “appreciate and guard against any special risk ordinarily incidental to it”

Question 17

Ogwo v Taylor

Answer 17

S2(3)(b), expert visitor… x apply to rescuers

Question 18

Ferguson v Welsh

Answer 18

S2(4)(b), d may be able to pass liability on ind con

Question 19

Bottomley v Todmorden Cricket Club

Answer 19

S2(4)(b), ind con: provided d took r steps to check z was competent

Question 20

Woodward v Mayor of Hastings, Haseldine v Daw

Answer 20

s2(4)(b), ind con: it was r for d to give the work to z & checked non-tec had been properly done

Question 21

Sections ‘57

Answer 21

• s1 permission
• s1(3)(a) o control p
• s2(1) common DoC
• s2(2) r safe
• s2(3)(a) child Doc
• s2(3)(b) expert vis
• s2(4)(b) ind con

Question 22

* covers claims made by lawful visitors against the occupier, as set out WvE.LCL

Answer 22

Occupier’s Liability Act 1957

Question 23

d must have either express perm (invitee/contractual perm), implied perm (licensee- LvW), delivery maker or legal right of entry

Answer 23

Section 1- ‘57

Question 24

d, the occupier (WvE.LCL), must be in control the premises (WvC)

Answer 24

Section 1(3)(a)- ‘57

Question 25

d owes a common duty of care to c as an adult/child lawful visitor

Answer 25

Section 2(1)- ‘57

Question 26

d must “take such care in all circumstances… is r to see that visitor will be r safe in using the premises” (LvKTS)

Answer 26

Section 2(2)- ‘57

Question 27

c is child =special DoC- PvBHW quote & GCvT allurement
-injury rf and w/o warning (JvLBS, LvYCC)

Answer 27

Section 2(3)(a)- ‘57

Question 28

expert visitor carry out work will “app and guard against any special risks ordinarily incidental to it” (RvN) x apply- rescuers (OvT)

Answer 28

Section 2(3)(b)- ‘57

Question 29

d pass liability to ind con (FvW) because c injured by their work provided:

• d took r steps to ensure z comp (BvTCC)
• r to for d to give work to z
• d check non-tec work properly done (WvMH, HvD)

Answer 29

Section 2(4)(b)- ‘57

Question 30

• OLA ‘57.. against the occupier
• D is the occupier

Answer 30

Wheat v E.Lacon and Co Ltd

Question 31

S1, implied permission e.g licensee *

Answer 31

Lowery v Walker

Question 32

S2(2), d must “take such care in all circumstances… is r to see that visitor will be r safe in using the premises”

Answer 32

Laverton v Kiapasha Takeaway Supreme

Question 33

S2(3)(a) child special DoC: D “must be prep for children to be less careful than adults… the p must be r safe for a child of that age”

Answer 33

Perry v Butlins Holiday World

Question 34

S2(3)(a) child special DoC: …especially if there is an allurement

Answer 34

Glasgow Corporation v Taylor

Question 35

C’s injuries must be reasonably foreseeable

Answer 35

Jolley v London Borough of Sutton

Question 36

…rf and without warning

Answer 36

Liddle v Yorkshire CC

Question 37

S2(3)(b), expert visitor “appreciate and guard against any special risk ordinarily incidental to it”

Answer 37

Roles v Nathan

Question 38

S2(3)(b), expert visitor… x apply to rescuers

Answer 38

Ogwo v Taylor

Question 39

S2(4)(b), d may be able to pass liability on ind con

Answer 39

Ferguson v Welsh

Question 40

S2(4)(b), ind con: provided d took r steps to check z was competent

Answer 40

Bottomley v Todmorden Cricket Club

Question 41

s2(4)(b), ind con: it was r for d to give the work to z & checked non-tec had been properly done

Answer 41

Woodward v Mayor of Hastings, Haseldine v Daw

Question 42

• s1 permission
• s1(3)(a) o control p
• s2(1) common DoC
• s2(2) r safe
• s2(3)(a) child Doc
• s2(3)(b) expert vis
• s2(4)(b) ind con

Answer 42

Sections ‘57