Occupier's Liability Act 1957 Flashcards
what is occupier’s liability?
refers to the duty owed by landowners to those who come into their land.
what is the occupier’s liability act 1957?
statutory duty on occupiers towards lawful visitors in respect of dangers due to the state of the premises or things done or omitted to be done on the premises.
what is the occupier’s liability act 1984?
imposes liability on occupiers with regards to persons other than ‘his visitors’. common humanity on to occupiers towards trespassers.
who is an ‘occupier’?
there is no statutory definition of ‘occupier’. can be someone who is an owner or tenant of the premises. decision of who is in control may be influenced by whose insurance policy covers the premises and is able to meet the claim.
what are the cases relating to the ‘occupier’?
Wheat v E.Lacon and Co Ltd (1966)
Harris v Birkenhead Corporation (1976)
HoL held employers can be occupiers and there can be more than 1 occupier.
what is meant by the term ‘premises’?
no statutory definition. s 1(3)(a) of the 1957 Act makes reference to a person having occupation or control of any ‘fixed or moveable structure, including any vessel, vehicle and aircraft.
what are examples of ‘premises’?
houses, offices, land, a ship in a dry dock, vehicle, a lift, a ladder.
what is a ‘lawful visitor’?
someone who has permission to be on your property. s2(1) the occupier owes the lawful visitor the common duty of care.
who is a lawful adult visitor?
invitees
licensees
contractual permission
statutory right of entry
who are invitees?
persons who have been invited to enter and who have express permission to be there
who are licensees?
persons who may have express or implied permission to be on the land for a particular period
who are those with contractual permission?
people who have bought entry tickets to an event.
who are those with a statutory right of entry?
right of entry e.g. meter readers, police constables
what is the standard of care owed to an adult visitor?
according to s2(2), the occupier does not have to make the visitor make the visitor completely safe in the premises but to only do what is reasonable.
what case demonstrate the standard of care owed to an adult visitor?
Laverton v Kiapasha Takeaway Supreme (2002)
not liable as they did not have to make the shop completely safe.