Occupiers Liability Act 1957

Question 1

What is the OLA 1957?

Answer 1

Act covering lawful visitors, the occupier owes a duty of care to lawful visitors and if it is breached and the victim is injured they are entitled to compensation.

Question 2

What lawful visitors are covered in this act?

Answer 2

• invitees, people who have permission to enter in the interest of the occupier
• licensees, people with express permission to be in the land for a particular period
• those with contractual permission
• statutory right or entry.

Question 3

Who is not covered in this act?

Answer 3

• trespassers
• those using a private right of way
• those accessing under an access agreement of national parks/country side
• those using a public right of way.

Question 4

What is the duty owed?

Answer 4

S1 ‘A common duty of care’

S2 ‘take care in circumstances to make sure v will be reasonably safe for the purpose they were invited’.

Question 5

Duty to adult visitors

Answer 5

Occ must keep v reasonably safe, premises doesn’t have to be 100% safe but state of it must be a real source of danger.
Reasonable care was taken in the case of Liverton v Shah Shah and was not necessary in Dean v Rochester because there was no real source of danger.
There is no liability for accidents and the duty is not definite shown in Cole v Davis Gilbert.

Question 6

Special rule 1 (Children)

Answer 6

Occ owes a common duet of care AND must make sure the premises is reasonably safe for a child of that age, this is because there are more risks to a child than an adult,

• must guard against allurement shown in Glasgow v Taylor
• damage/injury must be foreseeable shown in Sulley v Sutton
• parental supervision is expected for young children shown in Phipps v Rochester.

Question 7

Special rule 2(People carrying out trade on occ premises)

Answer 7

Appreciate and guard against any special risks ordinarily incident to it as long as occ leaves them to do so, shown in Roles v Nathan.

Question 8

Special rule 3(Independent contractors)

Answer 8

Damage to a visitor due to faulty work/repair my an independent contractor employed by the occ, the occ can only claim if:

• it was reasonable for the occ to give the independent contractor the work shown in Haseldine v Daw
• the contractor must be competent to carry out the task shown in Bottomley v Todmorden
• occ has to check that the work has been done properly shown in Woodward v Mayor of Hastings.