Occupiers' Liability 1984 AO1 (Eval)

Question 1

Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984

Answer 1

covers claims by trespassers

Question 2

Section 1(1)- ‘84

Answer 2

a DoC is owed O->T in resp: “injury on the p by reason of any danger due to the state of the p” (KvCNT)

Question 3

Section 1(3)- ‘84

Answer 3

O owes a ‘duty of common humanity’ on 3 conditions: —aware of danger (RvAWP)

• aware T may in vicinity (HvF)
• protection of known danger (RvM)

Question 4

Section 1(4)- ‘84

Answer 4

O must “take such care as is r in all the circumstances” to see T x injure “by reason of the danger concerned” (TvCB)

Question 5

Law Reform (Contributory negligence) Act 1945

Answer 5

defence of contributory negligence

-also: effective warning, volenti non fit injuria

Question 6

Addie v Dumbreck

Answer 6

defines trespasser as “someone who goes on land, w/o any sort of permission and whose presence is unknown to the O or, if known, is objected to”

Question 7

Keown v Coventry NHS Trust

Answer 7

s1(1), a DoC is owed by O->T in resp: “injury on the p by reason of any danger due to the state of the p”

Question 8

Rhind v Astbury Water Park

Answer 8

s1(3) ‘duty of common humanity’ 1/3: d must be aware of the danger/ have r grounds to believe it exists

Question 9

Higgs v Foster

Answer 9

s1(3) ‘DoCH’ 2/3: d must have known/r grounds to believe c was in, or may come into, the vicinity of the danger. x duty-> unexpected T

Question 10

Ratcliff v McConnell

Answer 10

s1(3) ‘DoCH’ 3/3: the risk is one against which, in all circumstances, d may be expected to offer protection

Question 11

Baldaccino v West Wittering

Answer 11

s1(3) ‘DoCH’ 3/3: x offer protection from ‘obv dangers’, may app to older children

Question 12

Donoghue v Folkestone Properties

Answer 12

O is entitled to expect that a T will x engage in foolhardy activities/ where expertise should make them aware of the danger

Question 13

Tomlinson v Congleton BC

Answer 13

s1(4) the O must “take such care in all circumstances” to see that T is x injured “by reason of the danger concerned”

Question 14

EVAL: stengths

Answer 14

• keep public safe, prevent injury force high SoC
• fair child DoC, less careful
• combo statute/case= high quality

Question 15

Eval: weakness

Answer 15

• unfair c has to prove d fault, disadvantages (CDS)
• judges find reasons x allow, RvM failed mainly tresp
• confrontational nature

Question 16

EVAL: overall

Answer 16

needs reform to better protect, compensation culture-> more personal responsibility