Occupiers Liability

• • Occupier's Liability Act 1957
  • Occupier's Liability Act 1984
  • Defences
  • Evaluation
• Facts about Occupier's Liability

  • Concerns the relationship between the owners of premises and visitors
• Who is an occupier - (Bailey v Armes)

  • Does not have to be an owner or tenant
  • May be someone else who has 'control' over the property in question
  • There is no statutory definition of an occupier
  • The test for identifying occupiers is found in case law
• Premises

  • No full statutory definition. Only in s1 of 1957 Act
  • A person having any control of: fixed or moveable structure including any vessel, vehicle and aircraft
• Lawful visitors - Occupier's Liability Act 1957

  • Rules concerning what kind of duty is owed varies depending on who the lawful visitor is
  • Expectations placed on occupiers may vary depending on: adult, child, person carrying out a trade or calling and and independent contractors
• Law concerning adult visitors - (Laverton v Kiapasha)

  • Every adult visitor is owed a common law duty of care
  • Outlined in s2 of 1957 Act
  • must take reasonable care
• Law concerning child visitors - (Phipps v Rochester)

  • s2 of 1957 Act places an additional, special duty of care on occupiers with respect to child visitors
  • must be prepared for children to be less careful then adults
  • depends on the age of the child
• Tradespeople - (Roles v Nathan)

  • When such a visitor is a tradesman or worker carrying out work on a property the law provides an additional rule
  • s2 of 1957 Act
  • Expect a tradesmen to guard against any particular danger arising out of the nature of the work to be done
• Occupier Liability for independent contractors - s2 - (Woodward)

  1. Reasonable for the occupier to have given the work to contractor
  2. Occupier must take reasonable steps to ensure the contractor is competent to do the work
  3. Occupier must check that the work has been properly done
• Defences to a claim by lawful visitor

  • Contributory Negligence
  • Consent (Volenti non fit injuria)
  • Warning notices
  • Exclusion clauses
• Warning notices

  • Warning notices are a complete defence when used properly
  • Can be oral or written
  • s2 - all circumstances it was enough to enable the visitor to be reasonable safe
• Sufficient warning - (Rae v Marrs)

  • When amounts to sufficient warning is a matter of fact to be decided on a case by case basis
  • The degree of risk will have a proportional relationship with the precautions that need to be taken
• Exclusion clauses

  • s2 of 1957 Act: restrict, modify or exclude his duty by agreement or otherwise
  • The age of the visitor however may affect this ability to defer blame
  • This only applies to residential occupiers not traders
• Occupiers Liability Act 1984 - Trespassers

  • Before the Occupier's Liability Act 1984 trespassers were not owed a duty of care
  • This rule led to some unjust decisions such as (Addie v Dumbreck)
• Change: Before the 1984 Act

  • Before the House of Lords recognised the injustice such as approach could create and changed in it the case of (BRB v Herrington)
• Occupier's Liability Act 1984

  • s1 of 1984 Act imposes a duty on occupiers to protect against injury of trespassers caused by dangers by the state of a premises
  • The Act provides compensation for personal injury only and not property
  • This reflects the notion that trespassers deserve less protection than lawful visitors
• An Occupier will owe a duty to trespassers when:

  1. He is aware of the danger or has reasonable grounds to believe it exists
  2. He knows or has reasonable grounds to believe that the trespasser is in or will be in the vicnity of the danger
  3. He may be expected to offer some protection
• Objective test - Factors to take into consideration - (Higgs v Foster)

  • Nature of the premises
  • Degree of danger
  • Practicality of taking precautions
  • Age of known or suspended trespassers
• Cases involving children

  • Same statutory rules apply in the previous cases concerning adults apply to children as well
  • Approach of judges towards claims involving child trespassers is the same as for adults
  • Factors such as age which might increase danger and thus increase the need for precaution
• Defences to a claim by a trespasser

  • Contributory Negligence
  • Consent (Volenti)
  • Warning signs
• Contributory negligence = Can reduce the amount of damages awarded. Blame to be assigned by a judge
• Contributory negligence = Can lead to a reduction in damages awarded. The judge determines the extent of blame
• Warning signs = The effectiveness is consistent with previous discussions. The adequacy of a warning of the for a child trespasser depends on their age and comprehension

  (Westward v Post Office)
• Remedies for Occupier's Liability Act 1957

  Compensation coverage: Personal injury and damage to property
• Remedies for Occupier's Liability Act 1984

  Compensation coverage: Personal injury only