• Wrong document? Swap it for free
  • Written by students who passed
  • Immediately available after payment
  • Read online or as PDF
Sell
Where do you study
Your language
Start selling Create your account
Document preview thumbnail
Preview 1 out of 10 pages
Lecture notes

Occupier's liability

Document preview thumbnail
Preview 1 out of 10 pages

Mentions the occupier's liability both to visitors and trespasser on a property. Follows by stating the defences a claimant can use in the court of law and if any exemptions to the law exists. Every important aspect is related to statutory law and occasionally to UK case law.

Content preview

Lecture 8 – Occupier’s liability


An occupier has a duty to maintain the premises safely for the benefit of third parties on or outside
the premises
 Occupier must also ensure that the use of premises does not cause unreasonable
inconvenience to other people
 Occupier’s liability Act 1957 – Visitors
 Occupier’s liability Act 1984 – Trespassers
o Both Acts only deal with the state of premises (static duty) any other situation is
covered by common law negligence (activity duty)
o Revill v Newberry (1996) – Farmer hiding in his shed shot at vandals on his property

Revill v Newbery - 1996 (lawteacher.net)
o Difference between dangerous condition and dangerous activity




Occupier’s liability to people on the premises
 Negligent activities – Occupiers who undertake activities on their land without taking
reasonable care may be liable to a third party
 Dangerous premises – Occupiers have a legal duty to maintain the structure of their
premises in a reasonably safe condition (statute law)
 Occupier’s liability act 1957 – Covers the liability of an occupier to whom the act calls visitors
o Regulates duty which an occupier of premises owes to his visitors in respect of
danger dur to the state of the premises or things done or omitted to be done on
them (s.1 OLA 1957)
o S.2(1) – An occupier owes a common duty of care to all his visitors to the premises
o S.2(2) – Duty to take such care as in all the circumstances of the case is reasonable
to see that the visitor will be reasonably safe in using the premises for the purposes
for which he is invited or permitted to be here
 Darby v National Trust (2001) – Claimant swam in National Trust’s murky
ornamental pond. Drowning was an obvious risk, so no warning was
required
Darby v National Trust [2001] EWCA Civ 182 - Case Summary (lawprof.co)
o Duty owed to particular groups

a) Children
 S2(3)(a) – An occupier must be prepared for children to be less careful than adults
 Premises must be reasonably safe for children
 Glasgow Corporation v Taylor (1922) – Red berries in public park (allurement – take
measures to protect children to keep them out of danger)

Document information

Study
Unknown
Uploaded on
January 26, 2023
Number of pages
10
Written in
2022/2023
Type
Lecture notes
Professor(s)
Unknown
Contains
All classes
£3.49

Wrong document? Swap it for free Within 14 days of purchase and before downloading, you can choose a different document. You can simply spend the amount again.
Written by students who passed
Immediately available after payment
Read online or as PDF

Sold
0
Followers
0
Items
23
Last sold
-



Why students choose Stuvia

Created by fellow students, verified by reviews

Quality you can trust: written by students who passed their exams and reviewed by others who've used these revision notes.

Didn't get what you expected? Choose another document

No problem! You can straightaway pick a different document that better suits what you're after.

Pay as you like, start learning straight away

No subscription, no commitments. Pay the way you're used to via credit card and download your PDF document instantly.

Student with book image

“Bought, downloaded, and smashed it. It really can be that simple.”

Alisha Student

Working on your references?

Create accurate citations in APA, MLA and Harvard with our free citation generator.

Working on your references?

Frequently asked questions