OCCUPIERS' LIABILITY

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
OCCUPIERS' LIABILITY by Mind Map: OCCUPIERS' LIABILITY

1. WHO?

1.1. A person who has sufficient degree of control over premises to put him under a duty of care towards those who came lawfully on the premises.

2. CATEGORIES

2.1. Contractual Entrant

2.1.1. Main purpose entrant

2.1.1.1. Purpose is the use of the premise in question, the occupier ensures that the premise was safe and all reasonable care and skill had been taken care of. Maclenan v Segar

2.1.2. Ancillary purpose entrant

2.1.2.1. Premise was mere ancillary, the occupier warranted that he had taken all reasonable care to ensure that the premise was safe. -Gillmore v London County Council

2.2. Invitee (common interest)

2.2.1. Whether the occupier knew or ought to have known that the invitee was being exposed to the unusual danger

2.2.2. Factors for liability include; if the occupier knows or ought to know the danger, danger is unusual, the danger is not known to the plaintiff & the occupier has failed to avoid such dangers.

2.2.3. Types

2.2.3.1. Legally authorised entrants

2.2.3.2. Business visitors

2.3. Licensee (no business interest)

2.3.1. Duty owed

2.3.1.1. The occupier owes a duty to warn him of any concealed danger or trap of which he actually knew

2.3.1.2. A licensee must take the premises as he finds them, subject to the occupier's duty to warn him of concealed dangers, not to set traps and not to injure the licensee by any positive act.

2.3.2. Types

2.3.2.1. As of right

2.3.2.2. By implied permission

2.3.2.3. Social visitor

2.3.2.4. Child licensee

2.3.2.4.1. Duty : Similar to those owed to adult licensee.

2.3.2.4.2. Factors include whether an object is an allurement, reasonableness of parents & primary responsibility of parents to ensure their safety. - Phipps v Rochester Corporation

2.4. Trespasser (without permission/ illegal)

2.4.1. Duty owed

2.4.1.1. Duty of common humanity

2.4.1.1.1. It is reasonable in all circumstances of the case that the non-visitor or trespasser does not suffer injury on the premises by reason of the danger concealed. -British Railways Board v Herrington

2.4.1.1.2. 3 requirements

2.4.1.2. Child trespasser

2.4.1.2.1. An occupier has a duty not to have on his land objects that are dangerous but are also an allurement or invitation to them. Glasgow Corporation v Taylor

3. DEFENCES

3.1. Warnings

3.1.1. An attempt to fulfil one's obligation by supplementing the physical state of one's premises with helpful information for the visitors.

3.2. Notice

3.2.1. Where the occupier is not trying to be helpful or informative, but is just trying to escape from liabilities by claiming that the plaintiff agreed not to sue for risks specified in the notice.

3.3. Volenti Non Fit Injuria

3.3.1. No duty is owed to any person in respect of a risk willingly accepted.

3.4. Exclusion clause

3.5. Contributory negligence