Pages in this set

Page 1

Preview of page 1
OCCUPIERS' LIABILITY

An occupier is not defined in either Act but the case of WHEAT v E LACON & CO suggests it is
somebody with control and HARRIS v BIRKENHEAD CORPORATION decided D does not need physical
possession and the key test is control.

A visitor under S1(2) is all…

Page 2

Preview of page 2
it was held for a major construction the occupier should not only have a competent contractor but
also a competent surveyor or architect to supervise the work.

Although it is not stated expressly it is clearly implied that in certain circumstances the occupier can
exclude their liability.

Under S2 (5)…

Page 3

Preview of page 3
Differences between the two acts. 57 is for visitors and 84 for non-visitors. 57 the duty is the
common duty and 84 is narrower duty of humanity. 57 the standard is to make the visitor reasonably
safe and 84 is a lower standard. 57 allows property damage to be recovered…

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all resources »