The claimant dived from a ledge on a cliff. In order to avoid shallow water he knew that he had to dive out into the pool but he failed to do so and fractured his neck. Held: The court dismissed his claim for damages saying ‘So far as the Act is concerned, by section 1(3) … Continue reading Bartrum v Hepworth Minerals and Chemicals Limited: QBD 1984
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
Where there was an award of damages for personal injuries arising under the Act, the judge was obliged to make some reference to the statutory duties under the Act and his findings relative to them. In the absence of a finding of a breach of duty, the judgment could not be allowed to stand. Citations: … Continue reading Manning v Hope (t/a the Priory): CA 8 Dec 1998
The claimant, a police officer entered the defendants premises at night in order to take up position to observe a suspect. He fell into an open inspection pit, and appealed dismissal of his claim under the Occupiers Liability Acts. Held: The situation had to be looked at in the light of the particular circumstances. There … Continue reading Higgs v W H Foster trading as Avalon Coaches: CA 1 Jul 2004
The claimant was injured swimming in a lake in a park. Warning signs clearly indicated that the lake was dangerous for swimming. Held: The authority were liable. They knew that the lake was attractive to swimmers, and that the signs were ineffective, but had not yet carried out landscaping works to deter swimmers. Under the … Continue reading Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council and Another: CA 14 Mar 2002
The claimant was walking home from the pub. He fell down an embankment by a road bridge taking a short cut, and was injured. Held: The claim failed. He was not a licensee of the defendant when he walked over the embankment. Questions arising under the 1957 and 1984 Acts had to be answered by … Continue reading Maloney v Torfaen District Council: CA 6 Dec 2005
The Claimant suffered a hypoglycaemic attack (being Type 1 diabetic) and was taken by ambulance to the Hospital, arriving at 22.00 hours. Within 15 minutes, he had left the emergency department of the hospital, climbed five flights of stairs to a flat roof, climbed over a protective barrier and either fallen or jumped into a … Continue reading Spearman v Royal United Bath Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust: QBD 4 Dec 2017
The claimant had decided to go for a midnight swim, but was injured diving and hitting a submerged bed. The landowner appealed a finding that it was 25% liable. The claimant asserted that the defendant knew that swimmers were common. Held: The Act imposed liability if four conditions were met: the premises were dangerous, the … Continue reading Donoghue v Folkestone Properties Limited: CA 27 Feb 2003
Citations: [1990] EWCA Civ 18 Links: Bailii Statutes:
Hospital’s appeal against a finding of liability under the 1984 Act to the claimant for injury incurred on their premises. Citations: [2005] EWCA Civ 1707 Links: Bailii Statutes:
A 15 year old was hit by a train as she crossed a railway line. She said the defender had not maintained a fence separating the street from the railway. The defenders knew that people went through the gaps walked across. She had crossed several times, knowing the danger and had looked out, but not … Continue reading Titchener v British Railways Board: HL 24 Nov 1983
The appellant sought leave to appeal against an order dismissing his claim for damages. He had been injured swimming in water on the defendant’s land. The defendant asserted that they had no duty of care to those who came onto the land and imperiled themselves. Held: New evidence showed that the defendant was aware of … Continue reading Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council and Cheshire County Council: CA 18 Jun 2001
The defendant had land across which a path ran. It had a right angled turn, and users cutting across wore away the land causing a dip, where the claimant tripped and fell. She claimed damages. The council accepted that the short cut was regularly taken, but said there had been no previous incidents or complaints, … Continue reading Peskett v Portsmouth City Council: CA 25 Jun 2002
The expression ‘reasonable grounds to believe’ meant actual knowledge or ‘shut-eye’ knowledge of the actual risk of injury to a child trespasser, or of primary facts that the court considers provides reasonable grounds for believing that the risk exists. Citations: [1996] PIQR 442 Statutes:
The claimant dived into a lake, severely injuring himself. The council appealed liability, arguing that it owed him no duty of care under the Act since he was a trespasser. It had placed warning signs to deter swimmers. Held: The council’s appeal succeeded. The risk of injury arose, not from any danger due to the … Continue reading Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council and others: HL 31 Jul 2003
This appeal raises issues about whether claims: (1) under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 (‘the 1984 Act’) against occupiers of land adjoining a highway; and (2) against the relevant highway authority; arising from a tragic road traffic accident were reasonable causes of action or had a real prospect of success. Judges: Lord Justice Lewison Lord … Continue reading Brown and Others v South West Lakes Trust and Others: CA 17 Jan 2022
Application for compensation under s.106 of the Building Act 1984 for compensation as a result of the Council exercising its powers to prevent access to Hastings Pier under s.78 of the 1984 Act. Held: The court rejected the defence, holding that the reference to ‘default’ should be read as default in respect of obligations imposed … Continue reading Manolete Partners Plc v Hastings Borough Council: TCC 12 Apr 2013
Prosecution to prove absence of genuine belief To convict a defendant under the 1960 Act, the prosecution had the burden of proving the absence of a genuine belief in the defendant’s mind that the victim was 14 or over. The Act itself said nothing about any mental element, so the assumption must be that mens … Continue reading B (A Minor) v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 23 Feb 2000
A motorist was convicted of an offence of driving a vehicle on a road without due care and attention contrary to section 3 of the 1960 Act. The question for the High Court was whether the road was a road to which the public had access. The road, a private road, provided a link between … Continue reading Cheyne v MacNeill: HCJ 1973
The claimant a young boy fell from a fire escape on the defendant’s building. He suffered brain damage and in later life was convicted of sexual offences. Held: His claim failed: ‘there was no suggestion that the fire escape was fragile or had anything wrong with it as a fire escape and I do not … Continue reading Keown v Coventry Healthcare NHS Trust: CA 2 Feb 2006
The claimant had applied for judicial review of a decision by the defendant to seek to recover a debt from them. The issue had however been settled in the County Court. Costs were ordered against them, and they now appealed. In a small company the chief manager and owner suffered a severe head injury, and … Continue reading Valentines Homes and Construction Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v HM Revenue and Customs: CA 31 Mar 2010
The claimant suffered a debilitating terminal disease. She anticipated going to commit suicide at a clinic in Switzerland, and wanted first a clear policy so that her husband who might accompany her would know whether he might be prosecuted under the 1961 Act. Held: The court considered the Code for Crown prosecutors, and other Guidance … Continue reading Purdy, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions and others: CA 19 Feb 2009
The claimant, attempting to slide down the banisters at the defendants’ premises, fell 4 metres suffering severe injury. She claimed in negligence and occupiers’ liability. The local council had waived a requirement that the balustrade meet the minimum height. The defendant had been told that it would neither be allowed to increase its height nor … Continue reading Geary v JD Wetherspoon Plc: QBD 14 Jun 2011
Sham requires common intent to create other result The court considered a claim by a hire-purchase company for the return of a vehicle. The bailee said the agreement was a sham. Held: The word ‘sham’ should only be used to describe an act or document where the parties have a common intention that the act … Continue reading Snook v London and West Riding Investments Ltd: CA 1967