Lecture 8: Occupier's Liability and Negligence

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

What is the primary principle of occupier's liability according to the text?

Liability for injuries on the premises (correct)

Liability only in respect of trespassers

Liability only in respect of lawful visitors

Liability for criminal acts on the premises

Before the Occupiers Liability Act 1957, what was the status of the rules of common law?

Abolished

Remained intact (correct)

Reversed

Modified

In Wheat v Lacon (E) & Co Ltd (1966), what was the main outcome regarding the duty of care?

Defendants were not liable as managers

Owners remained in control but did not breach duty of care (correct)

Defendants were not in control

Owners breached their duty of care

What is emphasized about control in occupiers' liability according to Harris v Birkenhead Corporation (1976)?

Legal control is sufficient for liability Signup and view all the answers

What type of visitors does the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 primarily focus on concerning liability?

Lawful visitors only Signup and view all the answers

How does the extent of an occupier's ordinary duty change according to Harris v Birkenhead Corporation (1976)?

It remains constant for all visitors Signup and view all the answers

What is the common duty of care under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957?

To take reasonable care to ensure visitors are safe on the premises Signup and view all the answers

In Ward v The Ritz Hotel London (1992), why was the hotel held liable for an injury?

Because they failed to meet the British standards but it was reasonable Signup and view all the answers

What distinguishes 'occupancy' duty from 'activity' duty under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957?

Occupancy duty is related to premises control, while activity duty is regarding actions on the premises Signup and view all the answers

What does section 2(3) of the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 state about children on premises?

Occupiers must be prepared for children being less careful than adults Signup and view all the answers

In Jolley v Sutton London Borough Council (1998), why was the council held liable?

Because the allurements were foreseeable and no precautions were taken Signup and view all the answers

What does section 2(3)(b) of the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 pertain to?

Expectation of special risks by skilled visitors in their calling Signup and view all the answers

'Warning of danger' under section 2(4)(a) of the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 means that:

'Warning' must be supplemented by additional safety measures in extreme cases Signup and view all the answers

'Warning of danger' under section 2(4)(a) of the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 may not absolve an occupier from liability when:

'Warning' was insufficient for immediate danger situations Signup and view all the answers

'Occupancy' duty under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 primarily revolves around:

'Control of premises' Signup and view all the answers

What must be done in order for an occupier of premises to owe a duty to a person who is not a visitor?

The occupier must know the person is in the vicinity of the danger and offer protection. Signup and view all the answers

In British Railways Board v Herrington, why was the defendant held liable for a child's injury on electrified railway?

The defendant knew the public was using the gap but did not guard against the danger. Signup and view all the answers

In the case of English Heritage v Taylor (2016), why was the defendant held liable for the claimant's injuries at Carisbrooke Castle?

The danger was not obvious and the occupier failed to take reasonable steps to reduce or eliminate it. Signup and view all the answers

What factor determines what is considered reasonable in providing protection against dangers for trespassers?

Difficulty and expense of guarding against the danger. Signup and view all the answers

What principle is reflected in the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 regarding the duty of care owed to visitors?

Occupiers must take reasonable care to ensure that visitors are 'reasonably' safe considering all circumstances. Signup and view all the answers

In Ratcliffe v McConnell, why were the occupiers not held liable for the student's injuries at the swimming pool?

The occupiers did everything reasonable in the circumstances to prevent harm. Signup and view all the answers

Under the OLA 1957, when can an occupier escape liability for dangers caused by independent contractors?

If the work done by the independent contractor was reasonably entrusted and properly carried out. Signup and view all the answers

Why was Congleton Borough Council held not liable in Tomlinson v Congleton BC despite a lake accident?

The council had done all it could to prevent accidents and had a 'no swimming policy'. Signup and view all the answers

What legal concept is encompassed in 'volenti non fit injuria' as per the Occupiers' Liability Act 1984?

The assumption of risk voluntarily by the visitor. Signup and view all the answers

What distinguishes warning requirements under OLA 1957 from OLA 1984?

Warning under OLA 1984 absolves liability at a lower standard. Signup and view all the answers

According to Lord Moulton in Addie & Sons Ltd v Dumbreck (1929), what duty does an occupier owe to a trespasser on their premises?

No duty unless the trespasser is harmed due to a wilful act by the occupier. Signup and view all the answers

According to Lord Wilberforce, what factor affects what is considered reasonable in preventing dangers on property?

Means and resources of the occupier only. Signup and view all the answers

In Ratcliffe v McConnell, what prevented the occupiers from being held responsible for the student's injuries at the swimming pool?

'No swimming' policy was habitually disregarded by visitors. Signup and view all the answers

Why did the Court of Appeal (CoA) overturn the trial judge's decision regarding LBS' liability in a specific case?

No evidence was presented that any warning could have prevented the incident. Signup and view all the answers

Why did the House of Lords reverse the decision and hold Congleton Borough Council not liable in Tomlinson v Congleton BC?

'No swimming' policy was not communicated clearly. Signup and view all the answers

What factor is crucial in determining an occupier's liability towards visitors under the OLA 1957?

Reasonableness based on all circumstances and ensuring visitor safety. Signup and view all the answers

'The court is required to consider all circumstances.' This statement is particularly relevant in cases involving what legal concept?

'Voluntary assumption of risk' under common law negligence. Signup and view all the answers

Why did Congleton Borough Council avoid liability in Tomlinson v Congleton BC?

Council took comprehensive measures but faced public disregard. Signup and view all the answers

'Occupiers must take reasonable steps.' Which case exemplifies this requirement under the OLA 1957?

English Heritage v Taylor (2016). Signup and view all the answers

What is the key difference between strict liability provisions under OLA 1984 and negligence principles under common law regarding occupiers' duties?

Strict liability applies regardless of fault, while negligence requires proof of fault. Signup and view all the answers

Why did the court find The Mayor of Hastings liable in Woodward v The Mayor of Hastings (1945) despite arguing that cleaning had been outsourced?

The cleaner had intentionally left a dangerous condition on the premises. Signup and view all the answers