They have the burden of proof, which means they have to effectively do all the work.
Unfair as it is the defendant who is arguably in the wrong
lawyer and court costs, aswell as high waiting times
However,
If the claimant has a good case this should be possible and it prevents uneventful claims
Also possible to settle outside of courts
If the claimant wins they get their money back from the claimant
Positive for both possibly
No set definition for occupier, common law states it is those who have the most control over the premises
Allows for greater opportunity to claim but also for defendant to have less blame if they have less control
Positive for claimant
policy of 'allurement' provides additional protection for children going into places they shouldn't, means they will be lawful visitors not trespassers
Positive
Act is statutory and well defined and reinforced in precedent
Positive for defendants
1984 act only allows for personal injury not property damage
Negative for defendants
Criticised for being too much of a burden on the occupier especially on the 84 act as the claimant shouldnt even be there.
Positive
Makes people more considerate of their visitors and accidents have been prevented as a result
