Occupiers' Liability Act 1984

OCCUPIERS LIABILITY The occupancy of premises is affected by two statues: 1) The occupier’s liability act 1957. Under this act there is a duty to keep safe and lawful visitors to the premises 2) The occupier’s liability act 1984. Where an occupier may owe a duty to protect trespassers onto the premises. LAWFUL VISITORS A lawful visitor has permission to enter premises. This can be expressed permission of implied. There are four situations covering implied permissions: 1) If the occupier

Q2 TAPC have been instructed by Riverside College to demolish a derelict building and replace with the construct of the Dunn building on a section on land within the college campus. A crèche in the local vicinity of the build are worried about the potential nuisance that will be causes when the building work been carried out. There are two types of nuisance, the first is public nuisance which is a crime and could also be a tort law. This is where a person or company threatens the health and safety

surface.Here we now need to figure out that who is legally liable for the accidental damage being faced by the visitor.To deal with these situations an act The Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 was passed. According to this act,the owner of the land owes ‘a common duty of care’ towards every visitor present on its land(except the trespassers).This act was basically passed to ensure the safety of visitors.Therefore it is a common duty of the owner to provide reasonable care to its visitors who are using

The first point to note when analysing occupiers’ liability is that originally it was separate to the general principles of negligence which were outlined in Donoghue v Stevenson .The reason for this “pigeon hole approach” was that the key decision of occupiers’ liability, Indermaur v Dames was decided sixty six years prior to the landmark decision of Donoghue v Stevenson . McMahon and Binchy state the reason why it was not engulfed into general negligence, was because it “… had become too firmly

site as well as legal responsibilities as an employer for his employees and their actions. The following areas have been researched: 1. General tortuous liability and contractual liability 2. Liability applicable to the owner of premises 3. Vicarious Liability and Health and Safety 4. Strict Liability Procedure The following research methods were used: Class Notes Text book: Modern Law of Contract, 5th Edition by Richard Stone Websites: en.wikipedia

Task1 What kind of liability do you think Ton should bear in Scenario 1? Contrast liability in tort with contractual liability Contrast liability in tort with contractual liability. There are three differences between liability and contractual liability: A. The difference of base. Contractual liability means that due to the breach of duty, contractual collateral obligation of contract or violates the "contract law" provisions of the obligations. Finding out a contractual liability has to be in terms

Liability in contract and liability in tort are civil wrongs where the injured party will bring a civil suit for damages. The two forms of liability require the presence of for conditions which are guilt, relation of the illegal act and loss suffered an illegal action and prejudice. Both forms of liability require compensation for the prejudice suffered by the innocent party and should cover the damage caused as well as the benefits which were not realized. In both caes liability arises out of a

There are three elements that must be present for an act or omission to be negligent; (1) The defendant owed a duty of care towards the plaintiff; (2) The defendant breached the duty of care by an act or omission; (3) The plaintiff must suffer damage as a result - be it physical, emotional or financial. The court might decide that Freddy (the plaintiff) was owed a duty of care by Elvis (the defendant) if they find that what happened to Freddy was in the realm of reasonable

proved that he carried out an illegal act in a blameworthy manner. An act does not make a man guilty of a crime unless his mind is also guilty. The state of mind of the D is hugely important in assessing whether or not he is at fault. However, to be found guilty of most criminal offences (true crimes) both an AR and MR must be proved. The

Danang University of Economics Sunderland University Program 24 Jan 2013 Danang 24 Jan 2013 Danang By: Doan Le Khanh Vy (Ivy) Class: SUD1 By: Doan Le Khanh Vy (Ivy) Class: SUD1 Business Law Assignment 2 Law of Tort and Negligence Business Law Assignment 2 Law of Tort and Negligence Memo To: Padmanaban Badri Narayanan. From: Doan Le Khanh Vy (Ivy). Regarding: Report On Common Law. Date: 9th December 2012. I am Ivy from class SUD11, Sunderland of University