occupiers laibility evaulation

• What two statutes govern occupiers' liability?


  1957 (Lawful Visitors) and 1984 (Trespassers)
• How does occupiers' liability relate to negligence?


  OL cases arise due to the state of the premises rather than human error.
• What is the nature of the duty imposed for occupiers' liability?


  The duty is contained in statute rather than common law.
• Is it morally right for a trespasser to claim for harm suffered while trespassing?

  This raises ethical questions about liability and responsibility.
• What are the core points on the evaluation of occupiers' liability found in pages 291-293 of the textbook?


  • Not all points are critical
  • Focus on AO1 needed
  • Separate general points from specific acts
  • Summary table with critical evaluation points for both acts
• What should be included in appropriate AO1 for an evaluation essay on occupiers' liability?


  Reference to specific duty of care owed under s.2(2) and s.1(3).
• What was the question assigned for homework regarding lawful visitors and trespassers?


  ‘Lawful visitors should have greater protection than trespassers.’
• What question regarding the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 came up in the 2022 exam?


  Discuss the extent to which the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 is fair on occupiers.
• What are the types of questions that could be asked in an evaluation essay on occupiers' liability?


  • Fairness of OLA 1957 to occupiers
  • Fairness of OLA 1984 to occupiers
  • Fairness of OLA 1957 to lawful visitors
  • Fairness of OLA 1984 to trespassers
  • Protection of children under both acts
  • Comparison between OLA 1957 and 1894
• What should be included in the introduction of an evaluation essay on occupiers' liability?

  • Description of Occupiers’ Liability
  • Explanation of the two acts and their functions
  • Planned structure of paragraphs
• What is the common duty of care owed to lawful visitors under s.2(2)?


  To take such steps as are reasonable to ensure the visitor is reasonably safe.
• What is the significance of the case Wheat v Lacon (1996) in occupiers' liability?


  It defines the term 'occupier' in the context of liability.
• What does s.1(3)(a) of the OLA 1957 define?


  It defines the term 'premises'.
• What types of lawful visitors are identified in occupiers' liability?


  Invitee, Licensee, Contractual/Statutory visitors.
• How does the standard of care differ for children under the OLA 1957?


  It is based on the age of the child and what is reasonably safe for them.
• What is the duty owed to workers under the OLA 1957?


  Workers must appreciate and guard against any risks.
• What are the defenses available to occupiers against claims from lawful visitors?


  Volenti, Contributory Negligence, Exclusion Clauses, Warning Notices.
• What is the significance of the case Laverton v Kiapasha (2002) in occupiers' liability?


  It illustrates the common duty of care owed to lawful visitors.
• What does the 1984 Act state regarding the duty owed to trespassers?


  There is no duty if the occupier is unaware of the danger.
• What are the key differences between the 1957 and 1984 Acts regarding the duty owed to visitors and trespassers?


  • 1957 Act: Objective test for lawful visitors
  • 1984 Act: Subjective test for trespassers
  • 1957 Act requires reasonable safety for visitors
  • 1984 Act requires awareness of danger for trespassers
• What is the issue with the objective test in the 1957 Act?


  It may not account for all circumstances affecting the occupier's duty.
• What is the significance of the case Tomlinson in relation to the 1984 Act?


  It highlights the burden on landowners regarding uninvited trespassers.
• How does the law of occupiers' liability aim to balance the interests of occupiers and claimants?


  It seeks to ensure fairness and compensation for injured claimants.
• What is the concern regarding the compensation culture in relation to lawful visitors?


  It suggests that visitors need to take responsibility for their own safety.
• What are the implications of the 1984 Act on the treatment of trespassers?


  • Trespassers were treated harshly before the 1984 Act
  • The Act imposes a moral duty on occupiers
  • Occupiers must take responsibility for accidents on their premises
• What are the implications of the 1957 Act on lawful visitors?


  • Introduces a common duty of care
  • Allows occupiers to restrict or exclude their duty
  • Focuses on the state of the premises
• What is the role of exclusion clauses under the 1957 Act?


  They allow occupiers to limit their duty to lawful visitors.
• What is the significance of the case Ratcliff v McConnel in relation to trespassers?


  It reflects the public opinion that occupiers should not be pursued by trespassers.
• What is the concern regarding the age of children in relation to occupiers' liability?


  There is debate over how much responsibility parents or occupiers should have for children.
• What is the issue with the allurements in the case Glasgow v Taylor?


  It raises questions about the responsibility of occupiers for enticing children.
• What is the significance of the case Phipps v Rochester in relation to children?


  It discusses the standard of care owed to children in occupiers' liability cases.
• What is the implication of the 1984 Act regarding knowledge of danger?


  There is no duty if the occupier is unaware of the danger.
• What does the case Rhind v Astbury Water Park (2004) illustrate regarding the 1984 Act?


  It shows that there is no obligation to check for hidden dangers.
• What does the case Higgs v Foster (2004) illustrate regarding the 1984 Act?


  It shows that there is no duty if the occupier has no idea a trespasser could be in the vicinity.
• What are the key considerations in balancing the interests of occupiers and claimants?


  • Fairness to injured claimants
  • Justice for victims
  • Cost implications of injuries
  • Responsibility of visitors for their own safety
• What are the implications of the 1957 Act on the treatment of lawful visitors?


  • Introduces a common duty of care
  • Allows occupiers to restrict or exclude their duty
  • Focuses on the state of the premises
• What is the concern regarding the growth of more dangerous premises?


  Occupiers must guard against accidents on their premises.
• What is the debate regarding the age at which children should be treated like adults in claims?


  There is uncertainty about when children should be held to the same standard of care as adults.
• What is the significance of the common duty of care before the 1957 Act?


  It established the legal framework for the duty owed to lawful visitors.