Lowery v Walker: HL 9 Nov 1910

A trespasser was injured by the land owner’s savage horse.
Held: If a land-owner knows of but does nothing to stop acts of trespass by the public on his land, there may be an implied license. Decision reversed. In Scottish courts the strictness of the duty of care incumbent on the occupier of premises varied according to the circumstances in which the injured party had entered on the premises, and on the extent of his right, or lack of it, to enter. The extent of right, and consequently the stringency of the duty of care, and the question whether care sufficient in the circumstances had been shown, were questions of fact to be determined with regard to the circumstances of the case


Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), the Earl of Halsbury, Lords Atkinson and Shaw


[1911] AC 10, [1910] UKHL 1, [1910] UKHL 726, 48 SLR 726


Bailii, Bailii


England and Wales


Appeal fromLowery v Walker CA 1910
An occupier of land who knows that members of the public are in the habit of going on to his land and does nothing to prevent it, may be deemed to have licensed them to do so. . .

Cited by:

CitedBritish Railways Board v Herrington HL 16-Feb-1972
Land-owner’s Possible Duty to Trespassers
The plaintiff, a child had gone through a fence onto the railway line, and been badly injured. The Board knew of the broken fence, but argued that they owed no duty to a trespasser.
Held: Whilst a land-owner owes no general duty of care to a . .
CitedRobert Addie and Sons (Collieries) Ltd v Dumbreck SCS 1928
A boy trespassed on land and was injured on machinery there. The local working-classes resorted to the field regularly ‘(1) as an open space; (2) as a playground; (3) as a means of access to chapel and railway station; and (4) – as regards the less . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Land, Animals

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.182878