Chapter 22 Occupiers

Question 1

What is the basic common duty of care owed to adult visitors by an occupier?

Answer 1

To ensure visitors are reasonably safe using the premises for the purpose for which they are invited

This duty does not require the occupier to make the premises completely safe.

Question 2

Name the two separate statutes related to occupiers’ liability.

Answer 2

• The Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957
• The Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984

These statutes outline the duties owed to lawful visitors and trespassers.

Question 3

In the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957, who is considered a lawful visitor?

Answer 3

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

Each category has specific permissions for being on the premises.

Question 4

True or false: An occupier is liable for injuries to a trespasser under the same standard as a lawful visitor.

Answer 4

FALSE

A lower standard of care is owed to trespassers under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984.

Question 5

What does the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 state regarding trespassers?

Answer 5

A duty is owed to trespassers but to a lower standard than that owed to lawful visitors

This reflects the different levels of responsibility for different types of visitors.

Question 6

In the case of Wheat v E Lacon & Co. Ltd (1966), who was found liable?

Answer 6

Both the manager and his employers

This case illustrates that there can be more than one occupier of premises.

Question 7

What is the definition of premises according to the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957?

Answer 7

Includes any fixed or moveable structure, such as vessels, vehicles, and aircraft

There is no full statutory definition, but case law provides guidance.

Question 8

What is an allurement in the context of occupiers’ liability?

Answer 8

Something on the premises that may attract children and cause them injury

Occupiers must guard against allurement to ensure children’s safety.

Question 9

What is the standard of care owed to children under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957?

Answer 9

Measured subjectively according to the age of the child

The younger the child, the greater the care the occupier must take.

Question 10

In Glasgow Corporation v Taylor (1922), why was the Council found liable?

Answer 10

The shrub with poisonous berries was an allurement and not fenced off

The Council was aware of the danger posed to children.

Question 11

What does the common duty of care not extend to?

Answer 11

Liability for pure accidents

This means that not all injuries will result in liability for the occupier.

Question 12

In Roles v Nathan (1963), why were the occupiers not liable for the chimney sweeps’ deaths?

Answer 12

The sweeps were warned of the danger and should have taken precautions

This case illustrates the expectation that workers will guard against known risks.

Question 13

What must an occupier do to pass liability to an independent contractor?

Answer 13

• Ensure the contractor is competent
• Check the work has been properly done
• It must be reasonable to give the work to the contractor

These requirements help protect occupiers from liability for negligent work by contractors.

Question 14

In Woodward v Mayor of Hastings (1945), why were the occupiers found liable?

Answer 14

They failed to ensure the work on the school steps was properly done

The danger was obvious, and reasonable steps were not taken.

Question 15

What must the occupier check regarding the work done on their premises?

Answer 15

The work has been properly done

The more complicated the work, the more likely the occupier will need to employ an expert.

Question 16

In the case of Woodward v Mayor of Hastings (1945), why were the occupiers held liable?

Answer 16

Failed to take reasonable steps to ensure the work had been properly done

The danger of icy steps should have been obvious to them.

Question 17

If all conditions are satisfied, what can the occupier use as a defense?

Answer 17

• A defense to a claim
• The injured claimant must claim against the contractor

This was established in Ferguson v Welsh (1987).

Question 18

What is the volenti defense in occupiers’ liability?

Answer 18

Complete defense where the claimant has accepted the risk of injury

This applies similarly to negligence claims.

Question 19

What does contributory negligence imply in occupiers’ liability?

Answer 19

Partial defense where the claimant is partly responsible for their injuries

The amount of compensation may be reduced accordingly.

Question 20

Under s 2(1) of the 1957 Act, what can an occupier do regarding their duty?

Answer 20

Restrict, modify, or exclude their duty by agreement

This applies to both oral and written warnings.

Question 21

According to s 65 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, what cannot a trader do?

Answer 21

Exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury from negligence

Such clauses in warning notices are ineffective.

Question 22

What constitutes an effective warning notice for an occupier?

Answer 22

Must enable the visitor to be reasonably safe

A warning is ineffective unless it meets this criterion.

Question 23

In Staples v West Dorset District Council (1995), why was there no duty to warn the claimant?

Answer 23

Dangers of slipping on wet algae were obvious and known to the claimant

The court ruled that no additional warning was necessary.

Question 24

In Darby v National Trust (2001), why was the occupier not liable for the drowning?

Answer 24

The risk to swimmers was obvious

There was no duty to warn of an obvious risk.

Question 25

According to s 1(3) of the **1984 Act**, who is considered a **trespasser**?

Answer 25

* A person with no permission to be on the premises * A lawful visitor who has exceeded their permission ## Footnote Example: In **Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council (2003)**.

Question 26

What must an occupier be aware of to owe a duty to a **trespasser**?

Answer 26

* Aware of the danger * Know the other person is near the danger ## Footnote This is outlined in s 1(1)(a) of the **1984 Act**.

Question 27

What is the standard of care owed to a **trespasser**?

Answer 27

Take reasonable care to prevent injury from danger ## Footnote The standard is objective and depends on circumstances.

Question 28

In **Ratcliff v McConnell (1999)**, why was the occupier not liable for the student’s injuries?

Answer 28

No hidden danger; the risk was obvious ## Footnote Diving without checking depth is dangerous.

Question 29

In **Donoghue v Folkestone Properties (2003)**, why did the occupier not owe a duty of care?

Answer 29

Could not expect a trespasser to be present at that time ## Footnote The incident occurred at midnight in winter.

Question 30

In **Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council (2003)**, why did the claimant's compensation claim fail?

Answer 30

* Danger was due to the claimant swimming * Trespassers must take responsibility * Not reasonable for the Council to prevent injury from obvious danger ## Footnote The claimant suffered paralysis after swimming in a lake.

Question 31

In **Higgs v Foster (2004)**, why were the occupiers not liable for the police officer's injuries?

Answer 31

Could not anticipate the officer's presence ## Footnote The officer was considered a trespasser.

Question 32

In **Rhind v Astbury Water Park (2004)**, why was there no obligation on the occupier to check for hidden dangers?

Answer 32

Swimming was prohibited on the premises ## Footnote The occupiers were unaware of submerged dangers.

Question 33

What does s 1(5) of the **1984 Act** state regarding warnings to trespassers?

Answer 33

Occupier can discharge duty by giving a warning of danger ## Footnote This applies to discouraging the taking of risks.

Question 34

In **Keown v Coventry Healthcare NHS Trust (2006)**, why was the boy's claim unsuccessful?

Answer 34

He appreciated the danger of climbing the fire escape ## Footnote The court held he took responsibility for his actions.

Question 35

What is the **statutory duty** owed to **lawful visitors** under the 1957 Occupiers’ Liability Act?

Answer 35

The occupier owes a common duty of care to ensure the visitor will be reasonably safe ## Footnote The premises do not have to be made completely safe.

Question 36

Who is considered an **‘occupier’** of premises?

Answer 36

An occupier can be the owner, tenant, or someone with control over the premises ## Footnote Premises include any land, buildings, or some form of moveable structure.

Question 37

How can an **occupier** avoid liability if they employ an **independent contractor**?

Answer 37

* It was reasonable to give the work to the contractor * The contractor was checked for competence * The work was inspected ## Footnote Liability can be passed on if these conditions are met.

Question 38

When is a **duty of care** owed to a **trespasser**?

Answer 38

A duty is owed if the occupier is aware of a danger, the trespasser is known to be in the vicinity, and where protection against the danger may be expected ## Footnote It is an objective test considering the premises, danger, cost of precautions, and age of the trespasser.

Question 39

True or false: A **trespasser** can make a claim for personal injury only.

Answer 39

TRUE ## Footnote A successful trespasser can only claim damages for personal injury.

Question 40

What are the **key points** of the **1957 Occupiers’ Liability Act**? List them.

Answer 40

* Occupier owes lawful visitors a common duty of care * Lawful visitors have express or implied permission * Common duty requires reasonable safety, not complete safety * Higher duty owed to children * Workers are owed common duty but must guard against incidental risks * Liability can be passed to independent contractors under certain conditions * Defences include consent, contributory negligence, exclusion clauses, and warning notices * Claimants can claim for personal injury and property damage ## Footnote These points summarize the responsibilities and liabilities of occupiers towards lawful visitors.

Question 41

What are the **key points** of the **1984 Occupiers’ Liability Act**? List them.

Answer 41

* A trespasser is someone without permission * Occupier owes a duty not to cause injury from danger * Duty owed if occupier is aware of danger and trespasser is nearby * Objective test for duty of care * No liability for unknown dangers or obvious dangers * Warning of danger negates liability * Defences include consent and contributory negligence * Trespassers can only claim for personal injury ## Footnote These points outline the obligations of occupiers towards trespassers.

Question 42

In **Keown v Coventry Healthcare NHS Trust (2006)**, what was the court's ruling regarding the **hospital's liability**?

Answer 42

The hospital was not liable as there was no danger due to the state of the premises ## Footnote The boy appreciated the danger of falling from the fire escape.

Question 43

In **Baldaccino v West Wittering (2008)**, why did the boy's claim fail?

Answer 43

There was no duty on the occupiers to warn against obvious dangers ## Footnote The boy was a lawful visitor to the beach but a trespasser to the beacon.

Question 44

What is the **defence of consent** (volenti) in occupiers’ liability?

Answer 44

A complete defence where the claimant has accepted the risk of injury ## Footnote This applies if the trespasser appreciates the nature and degree of the risk.

Question 45

What is **contributory negligence** in the context of occupiers’ liability?

Answer 45

A partial defence where the occupier argues the trespasser is partly responsible for their injuries ## Footnote If successful, compensation will be reduced accordingly.