Unit 6: Occupiers' Liability Flashcards
Scope of the Occupiers’ Liability Acts 1957 and 1984
‘Dangers due to the state of the premises’.
Establishing an occupier’s liability
To fall within the 1957 act a claimaint must:
- establish that they have suffered loss due to the state of the premises;
- identify the occupier;
- prove that they are a visitor;
- establish that the occupier failed to take reasonable care for the claimant’s safety.
Who is an occupier?
Lord Denning refers to an occupier as someone who has ‘a sufficient degree of control over premises’. Wheat v E Lacon & Co Ltd.
Does not have to be the owner.
Who is a visitor?
Essentially those who enter another person’s premises with that person’s express or implied permission.
Premises definition under the 1957 Act
Wide definition, includes open land as well as fixed or moveable structures. Specifically includes vessels, vehicles or aircraft.
Duty owed by an occupier (the common duty of care)
To take such care as is reasonable in all the circumstances to see that the visitor is reasonably safe in using the premises for the purpose for which they are permitted to be there.
‘Special’ visitors
Those who require a greater deal of care on the part of the occupier (eg children), or those who require a potentially lower degree of care (eg those who are coming to the premises to exercise their skills like a chimney sweep).
Children visitors
Special visitors. Where the danger is an allurement, an occupier must therefore do even more to safeguard a child’s safer than where there is not, so an increase of the standard of care.
Skilled visitors
The occupier is entitled to expect such a visitor to appreciate and guard against any special risks which are part of the visitor’s job.
Warnings
The warning given by the occupier must be sufficient to enable the visitor to be reasonably safe. Must consider:
- the nature of the warning, how specific it was
- the nature of the danger, if it was a hidden danger then the warning will need to be more specific
- the type of visitor, a written warning for a child may not be sufficient.
Should have an alternative available.
Independent contractors as visitors
If injury results from the faulty workmanship of the contractor, the occupier is not liable (provided they:
- acted reasonably in entrusting the work to an independent contractor
- taken such steps (if any) as he reasonably ought in order to satisfy himself that the contractor was competent
- and that the work had been properly done.)
Only for construction, maintenance or repair.
Remoteness for occupiers’ liability
Jolley v Sutton London Borough Council confirms that the test is the same as for common law Negligence.
Defences for occupiers
- Volenti
- exclusion of liability (clearly worded, covers the liability in question and steps have been taken to bring it to the visitors’ attention) - subject to control of UCTA (but claimants must be consumers), traders are subject to CRA 2015. Private owners are not subject to either
- Contributory negligence.
Who is a trespasser?
Lord Dunedin defined as ‘one who goes upon the land without invitation of any sort and whose presence is either unknown to the proprietor, or, if known, is practically objected to’.
The Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 duty
Owed to people other than visitors (trespassers). Only owed if these conditions are satisfied:
- the occupier is aware of the danger or has reasonable grounds to believe it exists;
- the occupier has reasonable grounds to believe that others will be in the vicinity of the danger or come into the vicinity of the danger;
- the risk is one which he may reasonably be expected to offer the trespasser some protection.
