OLA 84

Question 1

S1(1)

Answer 1

Must relate to state of premises

Question 2

Occupier owes a duty under s1(3) if points are met (3)

Answer 2

-occupier is aware of the danger
-have reason to believe the other person is in the vicinity of the danger
-may be reasonably expected to offer some form of protection

Question 3

Swain V Natui Ram Puri

Answer 3

Occupier did not have reasonable grounds to believe claimant was in vicinity of danger, not liable

Question 4

Tomlinson V Congleton

Answer 4

Entered as lawful visitor, then jumped into lake with warning signs, offered some protection in form of warnings so not liable

Question 5

Scott V ABP

Answer 5

2 accidents, 4 years apart, first incident had no grounds to believe there was a danger so not liable, however did have grounds after first incident so when second one happened was liable

Question 6

Platt V Liverpool CC

Answer 6

Offered multiple levels of protection, fences, warning signs, regularly checked, not liable

Question 7

Ratcliff V McConnell

Answer 7

No need to warn of obvious dangers

Question 8

Donoghue V Folkstone Properties

Answer 8

Where an adult deliberately risks injury, will be rare for occupiers to be expected to offer protection

Question 9

Revill V Newberry

Answer 9

Will even protect tresspassers such as burglars, however defenses such as contributory negligence heavily impact this