Occupiers' Liability

?
Wheat v Leacon (1966)
(Occupier)
The occupier is the person with control of the premises. There can be more than one occupier with control.
1 of 13
Laverton v Kiapasha Takeaway Supreme (2002)
(Duty Owed To Adult Visitor)
The premises do not have to be completely safe. The occupier has to make the premises reasonably safe for visitors.
2 of 13
Glasgow Corporation v Taylor (1922)
(Duty Owed To Child Visitor)
The occupier has to protect child visitors from allurements.
3 of 13
Phipps v Rochester Corporation (1955)
(Duty Owed To Child Visitor)
The occupier can expect very young children to be supervised by parents.
4 of 13
Darby v National Trust (2001)
(Warning Signs)
Occupier was not liable for death or injury caused by obvious risk.
5 of 13
Hazeldine v Daw & Son Ltd (1941)
(Work of Independent Contractor)
It was reasonable for the lift repair to be done by a specialist firm- occupier was not liable.
6 of 13
Roles v Nathan (1963)
(Workers)
The occupier can expect workmen to appreciate and guard against risks that are incidental to their work.
7 of 13
Ratcliff v McConnell (1999)
(Cases Involving Adult Trespassers)
Occupier does not have to warn adult trespassers of risk of injury against obvious dangers.
8 of 13
Donoghue v Folkestone Properties (2003)
(Cases Involving Adult Trespassers)
Occupier does not have to warn trespasser against obvious risks if the trespasser enters at unforeseeable time of day or year.
9 of 13
Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council (2003)
(Cases Involving Adult Trespassers)
Occupier does not have to spend lots of money making premises safe from obvious dangers
10 of 13
Higgs v Foster (2004)
(Cases Involving Adult Trespassers)
Occupier does not owe a duty to trespasser he or she does not expect to enter premises.
11 of 13
Rhind v Astbury Water Park (2004)
(Cases Involving Adult Trespassers)
Occupier does not owe a duty if he or she is unaware of the danger.
12 of 13
Keown v Coventry Healthcare NHS Trust (2006)
(Cases Involving Child Trespassers)
Occupier not liable to child trespasser if there is no danger from the state of the premises.
13 of 13

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

The premises do not have to be completely safe. The occupier has to make the premises reasonably safe for visitors.

Back

Laverton v Kiapasha Takeaway Supreme (2002)
(Duty Owed To Adult Visitor)

Card 3

Front

The occupier has to protect child visitors from allurements.

Back

Preview of the back of card 3

Card 4

Front

The occupier can expect very young children to be supervised by parents.

Back

Preview of the back of card 4

Card 5

Front

Occupier was not liable for death or injury caused by obvious risk.

Back

Preview of the back of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Law of Tort resources »