Occupiers Liability

Question 1

Wheat v Lacon

Answer 1

an occupier is defined by the common law; a sufficient degree of control over the land

• Lord Denning
• pub was entrusted to a manager who lived there, C was staying on the premises and fell down the stairs
• Held: the manage was the occupier of the flat

Question 2

Rhind v Astbury water park

Answer 2

The injury must arise from an occupancy danger: a danger associated wight he state of the premises (not an activity danger)

• He went swimming and hit his head on a fibreglass container embedded in the lake
• Held: this was a static danger as the container was not a natural part of the lake

Question 3

Tomlinson v Congleton

Answer 3

The injury must arise from an occupancy danger: a danger associated wight he state of the premises (not an activity danger)

• Struck his head on a rock that was located in a lake
• Held: this was an activity danger as the rock was a natural part of the lake

Question 4

Risk v Rose college

Answer 4

An Occupier is required to act positively to see visitors are safe

• 21 year old suffered spine injury when he dived into a small pool
• Horseplay was foreseeable but diving head first into a pool was not

Question 5

Phipps v Rochester Corp

Answer 5

An escape hatch from liability; Unaccompanied children

• children went through a fence and explored a construction site and one fell and broke his leg
• No breach as there should be no unaccompanied children on the site

Question 6

Roles v Nathan

Answer 6

An escape hatch from liability: The Rule of common calling

• 2 chimney sweeps cleaning a chimney died from a pocket of carbon monoxide
• Held: No breach as they were specialists and should have known and guarded against the risks that were common for their speciality

Question 7

Westwood v Post office

Answer 7

An escape hatch from liability: Warning signs

• A sign said “Authorized personnel Only”
• he went through it and fell through a defective trap and died
• Held that he was a trespasser BUT
• the notice was inadequate as the notice implied that it was safe to enter the room

Question 8

Haseldine v Daw

Answer 8

An escape hatch from liability: Independent Contractors

• Contractors faulty service of an elevator caused an injury
• Held: there was no breach as the damage was caused by faulty execution of work by the engineers

Question 9

Revill v Newbury

Answer 9

OLA 1984 Trespassers

• A man was in a shed protecting his valuable from thieves
• he shot one of them
• Held: it was reasonably foreseeable that he would have hit one of them and he used greater violence than was necessary

Question 10

Donoghue v Folkestone

Answer 10

OLA 1984 Trespassers;

• if the trespasser is an adult of sound mind then they ought to be able to assess the risk
• The duty can only be owed if the occupier had actual knowledge of the risk

Question 11

Keown v Coventry

Answer 11

Activity danger vs Static Danger;
11 year old climbed a ladder and fell
-Held to be an activity danger and therefore OLA didn’t apply

Question 12

Young v Kent CC

Answer 12

Activity danger vs Static Danger:

• 12 year old climbing on the roof of a building to get their ball back fell through a skylight
• Held to be a static danger because the skylight was in disrepair