Tort Law – Lecture 15
OCCUPIERS' LIABILITY
OLA 1957 (Lawful Visitors) | OLA 1984 (Trespassers) | Key Cases
1. Overview
Occupiers have a duty to ensure their land is not hazardous to others — specifically to ensure
visitors are not injured and property is not damaged.
Important limitation: Liability arises from the state of the premises, not from activities carried out
on the premises.
Statute Covers Visitor type
OLA 1957 Common duty of care to all lawful visitors Invitees, licensees, entrants as
of right
OLA 1984 Duty of care to non-lawful visitors Trespassers and unlawful
visitors
2. Key Definitions
Who is an 'Occupier'?
Common law definition: a person with a sufficient degree of control over the state of the premises.
Does not have to be the owner or physical occupier.
■ Wheat v E Lacon & Co Ltd [1966] – established the control test
■ Bailey v Armes [1999]
What are 'Premises'?
Under s.1(3)(a): any fixed or moveable structure, including any vessel, vehicle or aircraft.
3. Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 – Lawful Visitors
Who is a 'Lawful Visitor'? (s.2(1) OLA 1957)
• Invitee – requested to enter premises
• Licensee – permitted to be on premises (express or implied permission)
• Entrants 'as of right' – e.g. meter readers, emergency services
Scope of the Duty – s.2(2)
The duty only applies to 'the purposes for which the visitor is invited or permitted to be there'.
Scrutton LJ, The Calgarth:
, "When you invite a person into your house to use the staircase, you do not invite him to slide
down the bannisters."
The Common Duty of Care – s.2(2)
"The common duty of care is a 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 by the occupier to be there."
Standard of care: same as in negligence – the reasonable person test. Must guard against
foreseeable risks.
4. Special Classes of Visitor (OLA 1957)
Children – s.2(3)(a)
• A subjective standard applies – occupier must take greater care
• If damage is not foreseeable, there is no liability
• Occupier can assume reasonable parental supervision is in place
■ Jolley v London Borough of Sutton [2000] HL – child injured playing on abandoned boat
■ Phipps v Rochester Corp [1955] – parental control assumed
Skilled Visitors – s.2(3)(b)
• Occupier can assume a skilled visitor will guard against special risks ordinarily incidental
to their job
• Skilled visitor expected to take appropriate precautions themselves
■ Roles v Nathan [1963] – chimney sweeps warned of carbon monoxide risk; occupier not liable
Independent Contractors – s.2(4)
• Occupier not liable if:
• → It was reasonable to entrust the work to an independent contractor
• → The contractor was competent to carry out the task
• → Where possible, the occupier inspected the work
■ Haseldine v Daw [1941] – complex technical work (lift); inspection not required
■ Woodward v The Mayor of Hastings [1954] – simple task; inspection required
5. Exclusion of Liability (OLA 1957)
OCCUPIERS' LIABILITY
OLA 1957 (Lawful Visitors) | OLA 1984 (Trespassers) | Key Cases
1. Overview
Occupiers have a duty to ensure their land is not hazardous to others — specifically to ensure
visitors are not injured and property is not damaged.
Important limitation: Liability arises from the state of the premises, not from activities carried out
on the premises.
Statute Covers Visitor type
OLA 1957 Common duty of care to all lawful visitors Invitees, licensees, entrants as
of right
OLA 1984 Duty of care to non-lawful visitors Trespassers and unlawful
visitors
2. Key Definitions
Who is an 'Occupier'?
Common law definition: a person with a sufficient degree of control over the state of the premises.
Does not have to be the owner or physical occupier.
■ Wheat v E Lacon & Co Ltd [1966] – established the control test
■ Bailey v Armes [1999]
What are 'Premises'?
Under s.1(3)(a): any fixed or moveable structure, including any vessel, vehicle or aircraft.
3. Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 – Lawful Visitors
Who is a 'Lawful Visitor'? (s.2(1) OLA 1957)
• Invitee – requested to enter premises
• Licensee – permitted to be on premises (express or implied permission)
• Entrants 'as of right' – e.g. meter readers, emergency services
Scope of the Duty – s.2(2)
The duty only applies to 'the purposes for which the visitor is invited or permitted to be there'.
Scrutton LJ, The Calgarth:
, "When you invite a person into your house to use the staircase, you do not invite him to slide
down the bannisters."
The Common Duty of Care – s.2(2)
"The common duty of care is a 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 by the occupier to be there."
Standard of care: same as in negligence – the reasonable person test. Must guard against
foreseeable risks.
4. Special Classes of Visitor (OLA 1957)
Children – s.2(3)(a)
• A subjective standard applies – occupier must take greater care
• If damage is not foreseeable, there is no liability
• Occupier can assume reasonable parental supervision is in place
■ Jolley v London Borough of Sutton [2000] HL – child injured playing on abandoned boat
■ Phipps v Rochester Corp [1955] – parental control assumed
Skilled Visitors – s.2(3)(b)
• Occupier can assume a skilled visitor will guard against special risks ordinarily incidental
to their job
• Skilled visitor expected to take appropriate precautions themselves
■ Roles v Nathan [1963] – chimney sweeps warned of carbon monoxide risk; occupier not liable
Independent Contractors – s.2(4)
• Occupier not liable if:
• → It was reasonable to entrust the work to an independent contractor
• → The contractor was competent to carry out the task
• → Where possible, the occupier inspected the work
■ Haseldine v Daw [1941] – complex technical work (lift); inspection not required
■ Woodward v The Mayor of Hastings [1954] – simple task; inspection required
5. Exclusion of Liability (OLA 1957)
