Occupiers Liability

Question 1

Keegan v Sligo County Council

Answer 1

P had 5 pints. Contributory negligence may be considered as a defence for D.

Question 2

What did the Occupiers Liability Act 1995 do?

Answer 2

Reduced Occupiers duty towards trespassers. Prior to 1995, there was a duty on occupier to take reasonable care for the safety of a reasonably foreseeable trespasser. Introduced recreational user.

Question 3

Mcnamara v ESB

Answer 3

The 11 year old boy who injured himself when climbing an electric substation.

Question 4

Definition of Damage

Answer 4

Loss of property and injury to an animal

Question 5

Definition of Danger

Answer 5

A danger due to the state of the premesis. Static Condition

Question 6

McNamara v UCD

Answer 6

Low lying bollards case. Static Condition

Question 7

Allen v Trabolgan Holiday Centre

Answer 7

Paths case. Family resort,

Question 8

Ryan v Office of Public WOrks

Answer 8

Playground trip case. S. 4 of Act protects rec users from injury or damage arising from defects in the premises which constitute danger to users. This wasnt a risk.

Question 9

Lavin v Dublin Airport Authority plc

Answer 9

Not every risk which exists on premises will constitute a danger. Difference between usual and unusual danger.
£60000 reduced by third for contributory negligence.
Under S.3, Lack of care by P is linked with whether D complied with statutory or common duty imposed.
Occupiers should warn

Question 10

White v Doherty

Answer 10

Unusual Surface associated with caravan park

Question 11

McGovern v Dunnes Stores

Answer 11

No structural defect on premesis. Ordinary negligence principles. and not 1995 Act

Question 12

O’Flynn v Cherry Hill t/a Oliver plunkett bar

Answer 12

Occupiers do not need to be sure that a visitor wont be injured. Personal responsibility is a factor. Significance of injury is not.

Question 13

Newman v Cogan

Answer 13

Self repairs in the home: need to be of standard of reasonably competent tradesman

Question 14

Ryan v Office of Public Works

Answer 14

Playground case. Clearly recreastional user. Open to public, free of charge. Must be ‘inherently dangerous’.

Question 15

Kelly v Transdev Dublin Light Rail Ltd

Answer 15

Man hops fence to get not pay fee at trainstation. S4(1) Duty owed to rec user and trespass, not to injure or damage property intentionally, and not to act with reckless disregard.

Question 16

The 9 factors

Answer 16

1.Reasonable grounds of belief that danger existed.
2.Reasonable grounds that person was likely to be on premises
3. Reasonable grounds that person likely would be in vicinity of danger.
4.Whether the type of danger was one that person would reasonably expect the occupier to provide protection,
5.Was the burden of protection too much?
6.The character of premises.
7.Conduct of person
8.Nature of any warning given.
9. The extent of supervision and control the other person with P should be expected to exercise.

Question 17

Weir-Rogers v SF Trust Ltd

Answer 17

Sign put up on cliff. Reckless disregard is a high threshold

Question 18

Cray v Fingal County Council

Answer 18

Fell for no reason down concrete ramp. Undre threshold

Question 19

Fitzgerald v South Dublin County Council

Answer 19

Football Bottle case. Recreational User. HC test was an objective test

Question 20

Byrne v Ardenheath COmpany Ltd

Answer 20

Grass slope car park case. Occupier entitled to expect P to act with common sense

Question 21

Ahmed v Longford Town Council

Answer 21

They must take reasonable care to preserve it

Question 22

Wall v National Parks and Wildlife services

Answer 22

Boardwalk case. D hadnt taken reasonable steps. However in HC it was ruled that D wasnt negligent.