Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.

X

Phipps v Rochester

[1955] 1 QB 450

Case summary last updated at 18/01/2020 15:16 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case Phipps v Rochester

D tacitly permitted people to enter his land (he knew of it and did not mind) and P, a small child, entered the land and fell in a trench that D had dug for building work, injuring himself. P sued D. Devlin J dismissed P’s claim.
 
Devlin J: The trench would have been no danger to an adult or large child: only a small child was endangered since he could not have realised how dangerous it was. The general rule is that if a landowner permits the general public to use his land he will have discharged his duty of care if the dangers are obvious to a guardian (of children) or he has given a warning comprehensible to the guardian. The exception is if the landowner knows or ought to know that young children are using his land unaccompanied, in which case he should take steps accordingly. This isn’t the case here. 

Have you seen Oxbridge Notes' best Tort Law study materials?

Our law notes have been a popular underground sensation for 10 years:

  • Written by Oxford & Cambridge prize-winning graduates
  • Includes copious adademic commentary in summary form
  • Concise structure relating cases and statutes into an easy-to-remember whole
  • Covers all major cases for LLB exams
  • Satisfaction guaranteed refund policy
  • Recently updated
Tort Law Notes

Tort Law Notes >>