Occupiers liability - lawful visitors

• Problem 1 - not clear how far an occupier should be responsible for the safety of children

  occupiers should have a higher standee of care towards children, in (Phipps) the parents should be liable

  • this seems very harsh as 5 and 7 year olds have a level of independence but the parents were still found liable
  • extra protection given to children is warranted and that (Phipps) brings an element of fairness to the occupier, age of the child isn't mentioned which gives the judge flexibility
• problem 2 - occupier can avoid liability through warning signs and exclusion causes 


  the act says that duty can be modified which is possible unfair to C

  • whilst ways of avoiding liability may appear to be a barrier to justice, there are protection available to the most vulnerable Cs
• Reform - introduce no fault liability

  Injured visitors would be able to claim compensation without a need to prove how or why they were injured

  • the greatest benefit would be paying compensation to those who are injured, regardless of whether fault on the part of the occupiers, parents, children or those who have ignored the risks can be proven
  • however, the government has been reluctant to bring such a scheme and expensive compulsory insurance for every occupier would be unpopular, it is unlikely these reforms will be introduced