Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
5 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
What is the difference between OLA 1957 and OLA 1984
|
The 1957 Act deals with lawful visitors whereas 1984 Act deals those persons who are non visitors e.g. trespassers. gh the acts define when a duty of care is owe if an occupier breaches this duty under either Acts they commit negligence.
|
|
|
OLA 1957- What constitutes a visitors
|
Statute defines visitors in terms of those whom an express or implied permission to be premises has been granted
|
|
|
Snook v Manion 1982
|
Involves 3 categories or a person:
- invitees at common law s 1(2) -e.g. guest at a party -licensees at Common law s 1(2) e.g. postman -Policemen stopping a breach of the peace who have right to be there conferred by law s2(6) |
|
|
OLA 1957 Sec 2(1)
|
By limiting the exten of the permission given to a visitor an occupier can restrict the duty they owe to them.
"When you invite a person into you house to use the staircase you do not invite him to slide down the bannisters." The Calgarth 1927 |
|
|
Implied permission determined as a question of fact case by case
|
Glasgow Corp v Taylor 1922--> 7 year old boy died after eating berries from a bush in a public park. HELD: D was liable because they should have known it would attract small children and there was not even any warning of the danger.
Jolley v Sutton LBC 2000--> A 14 year old day was seriously injured when a boat fell on him. Boat had been left in grassy area for 2 years C and friend jacked it up and tried to repair it. HELD: It was foreseeable that it would be attractive to children even of C's age and injury was foreseeable if children played in or around it thus it was negligent not to remove it. (decision restored by HL) |
