Tort - Occupiers Liability Flashcards
Occupiers Liability Act 1957
Original Law regulating LAWFUL visitors - trespassers were owed no duty of care
Occupiers Liability Act 1984
Trespassers owed duty of care
Occupier
a person who has CONTROL over the state of that property
Wheat v E Lacon and Co
There can be more than one occupier
Harris v Birkenhead
Council can be held occupiers
Bailey v Armes
There can be no occupiers
S.1 (3) (a) Occupiers Liability Act 1957
Any fixed or moveable structure including any vessel, vehicle and aircraft
s.2 Occupiers Liability Act 1957
Adult Visitors are owed a duty of care by occupiers
s.2(2) OLA 1957
Adult visitor is owed a common duty of care as reasonable steps
Laverton v Kiapasha
no need to go above and beyond
Debell
occupiers cannot make sure that premises are in constant pristine condition
real source of danger
Cole v Davis
duty cannot last indefinitely
S.2(3) OLA 1957
Occupier must be prepared for children to be less careful than adults
Glasgow v Taylor
Should be no allurement
Phipps v Rochester
Parents should not allow children to go places that are potentially unsafe
Jolley v Sutton
Type of damage must be reasonably foreseeable not the way which it happens
S.2(3)(b) OLA 1957
Occupier should expect tradespeople to guard against any special risks
Roles v Nathan
Occupier not liable if tradesperson is doing something related to their trade
S.2(4) OLA 1957
if a visitor is injured due to contractors occupiers may have a defence
It must have been reasonable for the occupier to pass on the work to a contractor
Haseldine v Daw and son
Contractor must be competent and occupier must have checked the insurance
Bottomley v Todmorden
Occupier must have checked the work had been done properly
Woodward v Mayor of hastings
