Occupier's liability Act - 1957 Flashcards
What is meant by an ‘occupier’?
- The person in control of the premises
- Can be more than one
- Does not need to live there
What case confirms defintion of an occupier?
- Wheat v Lacon
- Occupier is a person with a sufficient degree of control over the premises
- This can be shared with others hence the landlord and brewery were both liable
What is meant by a ‘premises’
- A fixed or movable structure including a vessel, vehicle and aircraft
- Danger must be due to the state of the premises
What is the case to confirm ‘premises’
- Keown v Coventry NHS
- Hospital were not liable, the premises were safe and the boy caused the accident himself
What is a lawful visitor?
- Adults
- Children
- Tradesman
What is the rule concerning independent contractors?
- S2(4)(b) The blame can be passed to them if they did the work and are responsible for the defect
What is the rule for adults?
- S2(2) – visitors must be kept reasonably safe for the purpose they were invited there
- Premises do not need to be completely risk free, however occupiers must protect against real source of danger
What was the case that confirms adults?
- Rochester catheral v Debell
- Not liable - slips, trips and falls are everyday occurrences - premises must be reasonably safe, not completely safe
What is the rule for children?
- S2 (3) (a) It must be reasonably safe for a child of that age
- Very young children are the responsibility of their parents
- Any forseeable ‘allurements’ mean D will be liable
What was the case to confirm children?
- Taylor v Glasgow corp
- Liable - the berries were an allurement that Ds were aware of and offered no protection against it
What is the rule for tradesmen?
S2(3) (b) - Owe a duty to tradesmen but they should also appreciate and guard against any special risks to their trade
What was the case for tradesmen?
- Roles v Nathan
- Not liable - tradesmen have a duty to protect themselves against known risks to their trade
The 3 part test for Indepdent contractors?
- S2(4)(b) if contractors work is faulty then can pass the blame
1. D acted reasonably in entrusting the contractor
2. D took reasonable steps to ensure the contractor was competent
3. D took reasonable steps to inspect the work
What was the case for indepdent contractors being liable?
- Alexander v freshwater properties
- The occupier and the IC were equally liable - the contractors work was faulty and the occupier was aware
Defences - consent S2(5)
The common duty of care does not apply to a visitor who willingly accepted the risks