OLA 1984 Trespassers

What losses can be claimed for under the OLA 1984?

Personal injury only.

Premises

s1(3)(a) A person having occupation or control over ‘a fixed or moveable structure, including a vessel, vehicle and aircraft.‘

Occupier

Did they have a degree of control over the premises? (Wheat v Lacon)

Trespasser (Addie v Dumbrek)

‘A person who goes on land without any sort of permission and whose presence is unknown, or if known, objected to‘

Under s1(3), what 3 conditions must be met to establish a duty was owed by the occupier?

‘An occupier of premises owes a duty owes a duty to another (not being his visitor)… if-‘

a) He is aware of the danger or has reasonable grounds to believe that it exists.

b) He knows or has reasonable grounds to believe that the other is in the vicinity of the danger concerned or that he may come into the vicinity of the danger, and

c) The risk is one against which, in all circumstances of the case, he may reasonably be expected to offer the other some protection.

S1(3)(a) [Was D aware of the danger?] case?

Rhind v Astbury Water Park

s2(3)(a) [Does the D know the other is there?] case?

Higgs v Foster

s1(3)(a) [Is the D expected to provide some protection?] case?

Ratcliff v McConnell

s1(4) OLA 1984

If a duty is owed under s1(3), _____ sets out that the duty is to ‘Take such care a is reasonable in the circumstances to see that he is not injured by reason of the danger‘

s1(5) OLA 1984

Warning notices

Westwood v Post Office

Has C contributed to his own losses?

Does C know of the precise risks involved?

Stermer v Larson

Why C was exercising his own free will and has voluntarily accepted the risk

(Haynes v Harwood)