OLA 1957

Question 1

Lawful visitior definition

Answer 1

Those who have expressed or implied permission to be on the premises (Invitees, licensees, authority to be there)

Question 2

Adult visitors

Answer 2

S2(1) owed a common duty of care
S2(2) ‘reasonably safe’ according to purpose for which they are invited (cathedral v Debell)
Pure accidents are not provided for by the duty and specific risk cannot last indefinetly (Colve v british legion)

Question 3

Child visitors

Answer 3

Children owed a special duty of care
S2(3) premises must be safe for child of that age
occupier must guard from any allurement (Glasgow Corp v Taylor)
However, where an allurement exists, but harm is not forseeable, the occupier will not be liable (Jolley v Sutton)
Where very young children are injured, the courts are reluctant to find the occupier liable as the child should be under parental supervision (Phipps v Rochester)

Question 4

Tradesmen

Answer 4

Owed a common duty of care
S2(3)(b) says occupier will not be liable if tradesmen fails to guard against risk they should know about (Roles v Nathan)
S2 4 if a visitor is injured by worksmen negligent work, the occupier may be liable to pass the claim onto the workman if: it was reasonable to give the work to an independant contractor (Hasledine v Daw)
contractor is competent (Bottemley v Todmorden Cricket Club)
Occupier checked the work was done properly (Woodward v Hastings)

Question 5

Occupier

Answer 5

No statutory definition of occupier but will be person in control of the land
Could be more than one person (Wheat v E Lacon) both manager and owner liable

No definition of premises OLA 57 S1 (3)(a) ‘fixed moveable structure including vessels, vehicle and aircraft’

Question 6

Defences

Answer 6

Contributory negligence - partial defence by Law Reform Act 1945. Judge reduce damages awarded
Volenti - full defence under S2 (5) of OLA 57. voluntart expressed or implied consent (Morris v Murray) no damages
Warning notices - full defence S2 (4) provide defence if effective in keeping visitors safe
Additional warning - may be needed to keep visitors safe (Rae v Marrs)
No warning - needed if danger is obvious (staples v Dorset CC)
Exclusion clause can be used by residents to restrict, modify or exclude a duty S2(1)
S65 Consumer Rights Act 2015 - Traders cannot restrict liability for customer harm due to negligence

Question 7

Defences

Answer 7

Contributory negligence - partial defence by Law Reform Act 1945. Judge reduce damages awarded
Volenti - full defence under S2 (5) of OLA 57. voluntart expressed or implied consent (Morris v Murray) no damages
Warning notices - full defence S2 (4) provide defence if effective in keeping visitors safe
Additional warning - may be needed to keep visitors safe (Rae v Marrs)
No warning - needed if danger is obvious (staples v Dorset CC)
Exclusion clause can be used by residents to restrict, modify or exclude a duty S2(1)
S65 Consumer Rights Act 2015 - Traders cannot restrict liability for customer harm due to negligence

Question 8

Remedies

Answer 8

Compensatory damages - the aim of damages is to put the C back in the same position as before the tort happened
Special damages - there are ‘pecuniary’ as they can be calculated. May include pre-trial loss of earnings or expenses, specific medical costs ect. property loss would be compensated by valuing it at market value
General damages - unliquidated or ‘non pecuniary’ - the judges has to decide award. can be pain and suffering, loss of amenity, future loss, specific injuries
Mitigation of loss - the C must do all they can to keep any costs reasonable
Payment of damages - lump sum
P.I - civil procedure rules provide for interim payments before full settlement is awarded.S2 Damages Act 1996 regular future payments