Law, Occupiers Liability Act 1957: Visitor Structure

Is there a duty owed to the claimant? 

Only if there is: 

 

 

 

An occupier… 

 

 

 

A lawful visitor… 

Premises… 

 

 

 

State rule from The Calgarth (only if relevant) 

If the lawful visitor exceeded the permission and became a trespasser then Occupier Liability Act 1984 is used to prove a duty.

Was C’s injury due to the state of the premises s.1(1)? 

Consider Ogwo v Taylor 

In Ogwo v Taylor, The defendant (Taylor) negligently started a fire in his home while using a blowtorch to remove paint, Ogwo (A trained firefighter) was then scolded by hot stream while trying to put out the fire. The legal issue was, did the defendant owe a duty of care to a professional whose job involves handling such danger. The house of lords ruled in favour of Ogwo as they found it reasonably foreseeable that negligently starting a fire would require firefighters to put themselves at risk

Apply - Here

What is the duty? 

 Duty owed to a child visitor or an expert visitor, who was injured

The duty under s.2(2) is that ‘the occupier must take reasonable care to see that visitors will be reasonably safe using the premises for the purpose of their visit’.  

S.2(3)(a) - The duty owed to children, it says an occupier must be prepared for children to be less careful than adults. (key case Jolly v Sutton (2000))

S.2(3)(b) - Duty owed to experts in their calling, says that professional/expert visitors should: 

‘appreciate and guard against any special risks ordinarily incident’ to their job’. (Key case Roles v Nathan (1963))

Can the occupier discharge the duty? 

Warnings 

s.2(4)(a) - of the 1957 Act it may be possible for an occupier to discharge their duty by giving a warning of the danger. The warning must be enough to enable the visitor to be reasonably safe, so the occupier should make sure that the nature of the risk is clearly and specifically pointed out to those who come onto the land. 

Requirements for a warning sign to be effective, 1. the warning must cover the danger that in fact arise

2. On the other hand, there is no duty to warn against obvious risk

Were there any warnings? Was it an obvious risk? 

Independent contractor 

S.2(4)(b) - 3 Conditions

1. Occupier acted reasonably in entrusting the work to a I.C (Haseldine v Daw (1941)

2. Did the occupier take any steps in order to satisfy himself that the I/C was competent (Bottomley v Todmorden Cricket Club (2003))

3. The occupier was sure that work was actually done.  (Woodward v the Mayor of Hastings (1945))

Could D argue the C (visitor) was injured due to the faulty work of an independent contractor? 

Breach

What standard must the defendant/occupier reach (Blyth)? 

 

Apply the risk factors – were there any reasonable steps that D could have been taken? 

Damage/causation

Briefly state/apply the factual (but for test (Barnett)) and legal causation (remoteness test ( Wagon Mound)) to the scenario facts. 

Defences 

Contributory negligence or consent?

Do either apply in this case?

Remedy

The result is always remedy, If D is found to be liable they pay a Remedy