This is an extract of our Occupier's Liability document, which we sell as part of our GDL Tort Law Notes collection written by the top tier of Cambridge/Bpp/College Of Law students.
The following is a more accessble plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our GDL Tort Law Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:
Occupier's Liability _______________________________________________________
Occupier's Liability Act 1957 & Occupier's Liability Act 1984 'Negligence in statutory form' - the duties owed to visitors and non-visitors by occupiers of land Distinguishes between:
? Visitors: high level of protection
? Non-visitors: low level of protection This is fault-based liability - not all injuries are actionable Contrast negligence:
? Sue under 1956 or 1984 Act if they have been injured by the state of premises
? Sue under negligence if it is caused by something else o Revill v Newberry (above) - failed under Occupier's Liability because the homeowner with the shotgun was not a part of the premises Definition of Occupier OLA 1957 doesn't define the term occupier Occupation is determined by control of the land Wheat v Lacon Pub let out to guests in the private section. C's husband was a guest and he was found dead at the base of the stairs in the pub accommodation. There was no lighting as a lightbulb had blown & the handrail was too short. C sued the brewery owning the pub & the manager Held: were the brewery occupiers of the private area? They didn't have control over this bit.
? Lord Denning: you can have more than 1 occupier to a premises. The brewery had sufficient control of the land including the private space (though less control than the landlord) However this claim failed on breach - there was no conduct falling below reasonable standard Definition of Premises S.3(a) 'premises' includes a "fixed or moveable structure, including any vessel, vehicle or aircraft"
Liability: Visitors Duty to 'visitors' imposed by S.1 OLA 1957: (1) The rules enacted by the two next following sections shall have effect, in place of the rules of the common law, to regulate the duty which an occupier of premises owes to his visitors in respect of dangers due to the state of the premises or to things done or omitted to be done on them. Definition of Visitor Whether or not someone is a visitor will be determined from the reasonable position of the claimant.Scope of permission: The Calgarth A ship got into trouble using a navigable channel other than in the ordinary way of navigation Held: once a visitor goes beyond the scope of their permissions to use the premises, they will become a non-visitor for the purposes of the Act
? Scrutton LJ: if you invite a visitor into your house to use the staircase you do not invite them to slide down the banister Harvey v Plymouth CC C running away from taxi driver whom he owed money and made a getaway through a council-owned park. He fell over a ledge injuring himself and claimed the Council should have put up a fence Held: his use of the land was outside the scope of the permission given by the Council and therefore he could not claimThe doctrine of allurement: This doctrine is applicable to claimants who:?
>15 years old Where there is something attractive on the land
It treats such claimants as visitors by virtue of the allurement Glasgow Corp v Taylor Boy died eating poisonous berries from Glasgow Corp-owned botanic gardens Held: Council had not taken reasonable steps in regards to the allurement Jolley v Sutton (see 'General Negligence' doc)
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our GDL Tort Law Notes.