Occupiers liability

Question 1

Occupiers Visitors summary

Answer 1

• OL act 1957- owe a common duty of care
• Define occupier, Visitor, common duty of care
• define standard of breach
  -Consider side rules of whether visitor is a child/ expert
• Consider whether occupier can discharge their duty -warning signs/ negligence of an IC- apply two stage test

Question 2

Occupiers liability visitors intro

Answer 2

Under section 2(1) of the Occupiers liability act 1957, the occupier of a premises owe a visitor, “A common duty of care”.
- Define occupier, visitor, common duty of care

Question 3

Occupiers liability- visitors- occupier definition

Answer 3

• To establish who the owner of the property is, we use the sufficient control test. Lord Denning,” Wherever a person has sufficient degree of control over a premises that they ought to realise that any failure on their part to act may result in injury to a person”. There can be multiple occupiers to the same property (Wheat vs Lacon).

Question 4

Occupiers liability- visitors- common duty of care definition

Answer 4

• An occupier owes a visitor a common duty of care. Under S2(2)- this means that the occupier has a,” duty to take reasonable steps to ensure that the visitor will be reasonably safe in using the premises for which he is invited or permitted to be there”. The injury must be due to the state of the premises and not due to the activities of the visitor (Darby vs National trust).

Question 5

Occupiers liability- visitor definition

Answer 5

A visitor is anyone who is invited or permitted to be on the property (This can be expressed or implied).

Question 6

Occupiers liability- visitors- Breach

Answer 6

• Standard- Occupiers must act reasonably- what a reasonable person would have or not have done. The duty is limited in that it is only owed in respect of the purpose for which the visitor is permitted to be on the premises.
  -Apply, has the occupier fallen below this standard

Question 7

Occupiers liability- visitors- side rule 1

Answer 7

• Side rule- duty owed to children- Section 2(3)(A)- an occupier must be prepared for children to be less careful than adults. This is because children may not see the dangers or may not appreciate risks. Therefore, the occupier has a higher duty of care for children.
• Allurements are something on an occupiers land that will attract children. (Glasgow corporation vs Taylor)- An occupier should guard against any allurement that places a child visitor at risk.
  -However very young children should be under their parents supervision (Phipps vs Rochester corporation)

Question 8

Occupiers liability- visitors- side rule 2

Answer 8

• If the occupier is an expert- Section 2(3)(B) an occupier may expect that an expert will “ Appreciate and guard against any risks that are in the exercise of their calling”.

Question 9

Occupiers liability- visitors- 1st way of discharging duty

Answer 9

• Warning signs- The warning must be sufficient to enable the visitor to be reasonably safe. However, in Cotton vs Derbyshire council, it was held there is no specific obligation to display a warning sign when the danger is one that should be obvious to visitors.

Question 10

Occupiers liability- visitors- 2nd way of discharging duty.

Answer 10

Negligence of an independent contractor0- Under section 2(4)(B) the occupier will not be liable for loss or injuries suffered by visitors when the cause of the damage is the negligence of an independent contractor hired by the occupier, if 2 conditions are met:

Question 11

Occupiers liability- visitors- Independent contractor test

Answer 11

1- It must have been reasonable for the occupier to have entrusted the work to the independent contractor.
2- The occupier must have taken reasonable steps to satisfy themselves that the contractor was competent and that the work was done properly. Haseldine vs Daw held if the work is of a complex or technical nature it is less reasonable to impose the obligation upon the D

Question 12

Occupiers liability- visitors- way of discharging duty 3

Answer 12

• Consent- an occupier is not liable to a visitors for risks which the visitor willingly accepts.

Question 13

Occupiers liability- trespassers summary

Answer 13

• occupiers owe trespassers a common humanity
• A duty is owed for injuries caused by the state of the premises.
  -Apply three stage test about owing a duty
• Apply whether they breached their duty
• Apply ways the occupier can discharge their duty

Question 14

Occupiers liability- trespassers intro

Answer 14

• C may be able to claim for occupiers liability under the occupiers liability act of 1984.
• In British Railway board vs Herrington, occupiers owe a common duty of “Common humanity” to trespassers. This means that they don’t deliberately injure them or set traps.

Question 15

Occupiers liability- trespassers- stage 1

Answer 15

• Section 1(1)- a duty is owed to trespassers for injuries caused by a danger due to the state of the premises.
• Apply- were the injuries due to the state of the premises?

Question 16

Occupiers liability- trespassers stage 2

Answer 16

• Section 1(3), and occupier owes a duty to trespassers if: (Subjective test):
  1-The occupier is aware of the danger or has reasonable grounds to believe that it exists.
  2- The occupier knows or has reasonable grounds to believe that someone is in the vicinity of danger.
  3- The risk is serious enough that the occupier may reasonably be expected to offer some protection against it.

Question 17

Occupiers liability- trespassers stage 3

Answer 17

Breach- the occupier must take reasonable care to see that the trespasser does not suffer personal injury.

Question 18

Occupiers liability- trespassers- how can the occupier discharge their duty?

Answer 18

• Warnings- section 1(5)- the occupier may discharge their duty by taking reasonable steps to give warning of the danger or to discourage people. The emphasis is on making the trespasser aware of why they shouldn’t come onto the premises.
• However, consider that child trespassers who may not necessarily be expected to take notice of warning signs, therefore greater steps need to be taken by the occupier.