OLA 57

Question 1

Definition of “Premises” under OLA 1957, s1(3)(a)?

Answer 1

Any fixed or moveable structure.

Question 2

What is the common duty of care occupiers owe to visitors according to s2(2) of the OLA 1957?

Answer 2

Occupiers must make sure visitors are reasonably safe when using the premises for the intended purpose.

Question 3

What does s2(3)(a) of the OLA 1957 state about the common duty of care occupiers owe towards children?

Answer 3

Occupiers must be prepared for children to be less careful than adults.
The premises must be reasonably safe for a child of that age.

Question 4

According to s2(3)(b) of OLA 1957, what can occupiers expect from professionals (e.g electricians/plumbers) “in the exercise of his calling” who come onto their premises?

(persons in exercise of their calling)

Answer 4

An occupier can expect that a person in the exercise of his calling will “appreciate and guard against any special risks ordinarily incident to it, so far as the occupier leaves him free to do so.”

Question 5

When is an occupier not responsible for a contractor’s faulty work according to s2(4)(b) of the OLA 1957?

Answer 5

Occupiers aren’t responsible if they:

• Acted reasonably in entrusting the work to the contractor. (Chose the contractor carefully)
• Made sure the contractor was competent.
• Checked that the work was done properly

Question 6

What does s2(4)(a) of OLA 1957 state about warning notices?

Answer 6

A warning is ineffective unless, “in all the circumstances, it was enough to enable the visitor to be reasonably safe.”

Question 7

What does s2(1) of OLA 1957 state about exclusion clauses? (limiting their responsibility)

Answer 7

An occupier can “restrict, modify, or exclude his duty by agreement or otherwise.”

Question 8

What section defines “Premises”?

Answer 8

Premises = s1(3)(a)

Question 9

What section outlines the common duty of care for visitors?

Answer 9

common duty of care (visitors) = s2(2)

Question 10

What section deals with the common duty of care towards children?

Answer 10

common duty of care (children) = s2(3)(a)

Question 11

What section covers the duty of care for persons in the exercise of their calling (e.g., professionals)?

Answer 11

Persons in the exercise of their calling = s2(3)(b)

Question 12

What section provides a defense for occupiers regarding independent contractors?

Answer 12

defence against independent contractors = s2(4)(b)

Question 13

What section provides a defense for occupiers regarding warning notices?

Answer 13

s2(4)(b)

Question 14

What section allows occupiers to restrict or exclude their duty?

Answer 14

s2(1)

Question 15

What case developed a test to determine whether a person is an occupier?

Answer 15

Wheat V Lacon (1966)

Question 16

What is the test that determines whether a person is an occupier in the case of W___ v ___ (19__)?

Answer 16

Wheat V Lacon (1966)

A person will be deemed an occupier if they have a ‘degree of control’ over the premises.

Question 17

What are the main facts of Wheat v Lacon (1966)?
What was the outcome and what did it establish?

Answer 17

Wheat V Lacon

Main Facts: Manager of a pub rented rooms in his private quarters. A guest fell on an unlit staircase and died.

Outcome: Both manager and his employers were considered occupiers due to their degree of control over the premises.

Apply: More than one person can be an occupier if they have control over the premises.

Question 18

What are the main facts of Bailey V Armes?
What was the outcome and what did it establish?

Answer 18

Main Facts: D’s son took a friend onto a roof they were allowed access to but were forbidden from sharing with others. The friend fell and was injured.

Outcome: Neither the defendants nor the supermarket were considered occupiers as they did not have sufficient control over the roof.

Apply: Lack of control over a specific area means you may not be deemed an occupier.

Question 19

List the 4 types of lawful adult visitors for OLA 57

Answer 19

• Invitees
• Licensees
• Those with contractual permission
• Statutory right of entry

Question 20

What are invitees?

Answer 20

Persons with express permission to be there
(e.g a friend invited for tea/someone using a shortcut on the land with permission)

Question 21

What are licensees?

Answer 21

Persons with express or implied permission for a specific purpose (e.g. customers).

Question 22

An example of a person with contractual permission?

Answer 22

A person who has bought an entry ticket for an event

Question 23

Give 2 examples of those given a statutory right of entry.

Answer 23

E.g. meter readers, police with a warrant.

Question 24

What is the case name for lawful visitors?

Answer 24

Laverton V Kiapasha Takeaway

Question 25

What are the main facts of Laverton V Kiapasha
Takeaway?
What was the outcome and what did it establish?

Answer 25

Main Facts: D’s owned a takeaway shop, used slip-resistant tiles, and mopped the floor. A customer slipped and broke her ankle.

Outcome: CoA held that the shop owners had taken reasonable care and were not liable. They did not need to make the shop completely safe.

Apply: Occupiers must ensure reasonable safety but are not required to eliminate all risks.

Question 26

s2(3)(b) OLA 57 say that an occupier can expect a person in the exercise of his calling will…

Answer 26

“appreciate and gaurd against any special risks ordinarily incident to it so far as the occupier leaves him free to do so”

Question 27

What does “appreciate and gaurd against any special risks ordinarily incident to it so far as the occupier leaves him free to do so” from s2(3)(b) mean?

Answer 27

s2(3)(b) means = someone who has come onto the land to do a job should be aware of risks often present when completing their job. Occupier is not liable if visitor is injured by risk he should be aware of.

Question 28

What are the main facts of Roles V Nathan?
What was the outcome and what did it establish?

Answer 28

Main Facts: Two chimney sweeps died from inhaling carbon monoxide fumes while cleaning a chimney. They were warned of the danger.

Outcome: Occupiers were not liable as the chimney sweeps should have been aware of the particular danger.

Apply: Occupiers are not liable when tradesmen are injured by risks related to their job.

Question 29

What are the 3 requirements from s2(4)(b) OLA 1957 for occupier to not be liable for independent contractor’s injuries?

Answer 29

• Must be reasonable to give the work to a contractor. The more complicated and specialized the work, the more likely it is reasonable to hire a contractor.
• The contractor hired must be competent. - Check references, recommendations, and insurance coverage to ensure competence.
• The occupier must check that the work has been properly done. - (e.g., by an architect or surveyor).

Question 30

What are the main facts of Haseldine V Daw & Son Ltd?
What was the outcome?

Answer 30

Main facts: C was killed when a lift plunged to the bottom shaft

Outcome: Occupier was not liable for the negligent repair because the work was highly specialized, and it was reasonable to entrust it to a specialist.

Question 31

What is the case name for visitors carrying out a trade/calling - s2(3)(b)?

Answer 31

s2(3)(b) = Roles V Nathan

Question 32

What is the case name for s2(4)(b) - requirement: It must be reasonable to give the work to a contractor.

Answer 32

s2(4)(b) = Haseldine V Daw & Son Ltd

Question 33

What are the main facts of Bottomley V Todmorden Cricket Club?
What was the outcome?

Answer 33

Main Facts: A cricket club hired an incompetent and uninsured stunt team, leading to the claimant’s injury.

Outcome: CoA held that the club was liable for not exercising reasonable care in choosing safe and competent contractors.

Question 34

What are the main facts of Woodward V The Mayor?
What was the outcome?

Answer 34

Main Facts: A child was injured on icy steps that were not properly cleared.

Outcome: The occupiers were liable as they had failed to take reasonable steps to check the work was done properly and the danger should’ve been obvious.

Question 35

What does it say under s2(3)(a) about children visitors?

Answer 35

the occupier “must be prepared for children to be less careful than adults… the premises must be reasonably safe for a child of that age.”

Question 36

What are the main facts of Glasgow Corp v Taylor?
What was the outcome?

Answer 36

Main Facts: 7-year-old child ate poisonous berries from an unfenced shrub in a public park and died.

Outcome: The council was liable - berries were an allurement to young children, and they were aware of the danger.

Apply: Highlights the need for occupiers to take extra precautions if something on their property could attract and harm a child.

Question 37

What are the main facts of Phipps V Rochester Corp?
What was the outcome?

Answer 37

Main facts: 5-year-old child fell into a trench and was injured while playing on open ground owned by the council.

Outcome: The council was not liable because the occupier is entitled to expect that parents will supervise their young children and not allow them to go to potentially unsafe places.

Apply: Responsibility may shift to parents when it comes to supervising young children in certain situations.

Question 38

What does it state under (s2(4)(a) about warning notices?

Answer 38

A warning notice can be a complete defense if it enables the visitor to be reasonably safe.

A warning doesn’t work as a defense unless it’s clear enough to make the visitor aware of the danger, considering all the conditions and details of the situation

Question 39

What are the main facts of Rae V Marrs?
What was the outcome?

Answer 39

Main Facts: The case involved a deep pit in a dark shed where the warning could not be seen.

Outcome: The warning was insufficient because it could not be seen, so the occupier was not protected by the warning notice.

Question 40

What are the main facts of Staples v West Dorset?
What was the outcome?

Answer 40

Main Facts: Visitor slipped on wet algae on a high wall, which was an obvious danger.

Outcome: The court held that no further warning was necessary because the risk should have been obvious to the visitor.

Question 41

What does s2(1) OLA 1957 allow an occupier to do regarding their duty?

Answer 41

An occupier is able to ‘restrict, modify or exclude his duty by agreement or otherwise’ for injuries through a clause in a warning notice.

Question 42

Can an exclusion clause work against a child visitor under s2(1) OLA 1957?

Answer 42

It may not work if the child is too young or doesn’t understand the warning.

Question 43

What does the s65 Consumer Rights Act 2015 say about limiting liability?

Answer 43

A trader cannot limit or exclude responsibility for death or injury caused by negligence.
- Meaning if there are such clauses in a warning notice, they’re ineffective and can’t operate as a defence for occupier.

Question 44

Provide an example for the s65 Consumer Rights Act 2015

Answer 44

Scenario: A gym requires members to sign a form saying, “The gym is not liable for any accidents.”

Explanation: If a piece of gym equipment is broken and someone gets hurt because the gym didn’t fix it, the gym can’t avoid being responsible just because of the form. The injury was caused by their negligence.

Question 45

Who does OLA 1957 apply to?

Answer 45

Lawful visitors

Question 46

What are the four types of lawful visitor?

Answer 46

• Contractual
• Invitee
  -Lisencsee
• Statutory permission

Question 47

What did case Glasgow V Taylor establish for children? How old?

Answer 47

should keep children reasonable safe for their age from allurement (5 years old)