Occupiers Liability

Question 1

Occupiers liability - definition

Answer 1

Injury to someone on someone else’s land

Only concerned with injury caused by condition of premises

Question 2

Occupiers liability statutes

Answer 2

Occupiers liability act 1957 - lawful visitors

Occupiers liability act 1984 - trespassers

Question 3

To claim under OLA 1957

Answer 3

C must show

1) lawful visitor
2) d is the occupier of the premises
3) d was in breach of his duty owed to c

Question 4

Definition of occupier

Case

Answer 4

S1 of Ola 1957
Wheat v e lacon and co ltd 1966 - someone who has sufficient degree of control over premises or someone who has occupational control - contractor may have control over specific area

Question 5

Who is a visitor

Answer 5

Invitee or licensee who enters property with express or implied permission f the occupier

Question 6

People who do not qualify as visitors under ola 1957

Answer 6

Trespassers
Using private right of way
Public right of way
Entering under countryside rights of way act 2000
Entering and exercising rifts under national parks and access to the countryside act 1949

Question 7

Premises defined

Answer 7

Widely as land buildings, ladders scaffolding vehicles

Question 8

Common duty of care - occupiers definition under ola 1957

Answer 8

S2(2) Occupier must reach common duty of care is to take such care as is reasonable in all circumstances reasonable to see visitor is reasonably safe for purpose invited
Automatic under s2(1) Ola 1957 once visitor and occupier established

Question 9

Ola 1957 - factors assessed in determine breach and section

Answer 9

S2(2) ola 1957
Nature of danger 
Purpose of visit 
Seriousness of injury risk
Magnitude of risk
Cost and practicality of avoiding 
Any warnings of danger

Question 10

Ola 1957 - special visitors

Cases

Answer 10

Children - may not see dangers adult would - Taylor v Glasgow corporation 1922
Phipps v Rochester corporation 1955 -,primary responsibility for young children rests with parents
Skilled visitors - could be expected to take care of themselves

Question 11

Ola 1957 - warnings

Answer 11

S2(4)(a) ola 1957 - warning sign needs to be sufficient to enable visitor to be reasonably safe - was it big specific enough
Darby v national trust 2001
Warnings - try to avoid breaching duty of care
Exclusion - looks to operate as defence a

Question 12

Ola 1957 - contractors

Answer 12

If occupier employs contractor they must
A) be able to show was needed
B) ensure contractor competent
C) check work done is satisfactory

Question 13

Ola 1957 - remoteness / causation

Answer 13

Damage has to be reasonably foreseeable - same as negligence

And causation - but for test

Question 14

Occupiers liability ola 1957 - defences

Answer 14

Assumption of risk - s2(5) preserves defence of consent - c must know and accept precise risk
Exclusion of liability - s2(1) allows exclusion of liability by agreement - business owner governed by UCTA 1977 - private occupier not and can exclude
Contributory negligence - can apply

Question 15

Liability of occupiers to trespassers - statute

Answer 15

Occupiers liability act 1984

Question 16

Definition of trespasser under ola 1984

Plus case

Answer 16

Someone who goes on land without invitation of any sort and whose presence is either unknown to the proprietor or if known is objected to
Robert addie and sons (Colliers) ltd v dumbreck 1929

Question 17

Ola 1984 - what does it do and who is covered

Answer 17

Imposes duty on occupier of premises - same as 1957 act
Owed to others not classed as visitors being:
Trespassers
Using private right of way
Entering under rights of countryside and rights of way act 2000
People exercising rights under national parks and access to the countryside act 1949

Question 18

Ola 1984 - when does duty arise

Answer 18

All three must be present

1) occupier is aware of danger has reasonable grounds to believe exists s1(3)(a)
2) occupier knows or has reasonable grounds to believe trespasser in vincinity of the danger or may come in s1(3)(b)
3) occupier should offer some protection against danger s1(3)(c)

Question 19

Does occupier know trespasser in vincinity of danger

Plus 3 cases

Answer 19

Section 1(3)(b) Ola 1984 
Cases - White v St. Albans city and Dc  - no evidence council knew of shortcut through building site 
Donoghue v Folkestone properties ltd 2003 - no way harbour owner could know man would jump in for midnight swim 
Higgs v foster t/a Avalon coaches 2004 - police officer entered yard and fell down hole

Question 20

Occupier should offer some protection Ola 1984 s1(3)(c)

Answer 20

Section 1(3)(c) Ola 1984
Courts contemplate following elements.
Nature and extent of risk
Type of known /’likely trespassers
What practical precautions could have been taking
Tomlinson v congleton borough council 2003 - occupier of. Natural lake not expected to fence it

Question 21

Ola 1984 - nature of the duty

Answer 21

Standard of care covered by s1(4) , reasonable care to see trespasser not injured by danger
Property damage not recoverable
Factors considered : nature of danger, age of trespasser, nature of premises, nature and character of entry, seriousness of injury risk, magnitude of risk, cost and practicality of avoiding risk, foreseeability of trespass

Question 22

Ola 1984 - children trespass / case

Answer 22

Pannett v mcguinness and co ltd 1972 - child injured on building site next to park . Succeeded

Question 23

Ola 1984 - acceptance of risk

Answer 23

S1(6) states if c accepts risk will escape liability - defence of consent preserved

No provision to exclude liability up to court - UCTA does not apply

Question 24

Occupiers liability - problem question structure

Answer 24

Definition 
Is d an occupier in control of premises 
Was c a visitor or trespasser 
Is consent exceeded 
Is duty owed 
Hasn't been breached 
Consider warning 
Causation / remoteness 
Defences