Law Of Tort

The profession of c atomic number 18 owed by owners and residents of expound is a statutory craft imposed by the Occupiers Liability Acts 1957 and 1984 By virtuousness of the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 , the surety of indebtedness of awe imposed on resident physicians is a obligation in reward of all visitors to the exposit in question . The profession of c atomic number 18 is a habitual duty . The Occupiers Liability Act 1984 imposes a limited duty of care in mention of persons who are non visitors . In popular the 1984 Act requires that an occupant take bonnie stairs to hold on dishonor to interlopers in circumstances where a sleep to driveher luck exist on the set forth in questionThe duty of care owed by Ahmed as the owner and occupier of the conjure land to Ali is regulated by the Occupiers Liabilit y Act 1984 .

plaza 1 (1 (a ) sets out that a duty of care is bear by the owner or occupier of premise to persons who are not visitors in wish of injuries sustain on the premises in question if the injury is caused by a jeopardy existing on the premises at that timeHowever , Section 1 (3 ) limits that duty of care as follows :-`An occupier of premises owes a duty to an separate (not be his visitor in respect of any such hazard as is referred to in section (1 ) above if :- (a ) he is aware of the danger or has middling chiliad to believe that it exists (b ) he knows or has reasonable thou to believe that the other is in the region of the danger ! come across on or that he may come into the vicinity of the danger (in either case , whether he has lawful leave for being in that vicinity or not and (c ) the risk is unrivalled against which , in all the circumstances of the case he may reasonably be expected to offer the other many justificationPrior to the Occupiers Liability Act 1984 , an occupier of premises did not owe a duty of care in respect of interlopers . The duty of care existed at common law and was so delimit as to virtually exclude all classes of interlopers or unwelcome visitors . Lord Hailsham had defined that duty in very(prenominal) living terms when he said that `towards the trespasser the occupier has no duty to take reasonable care for his protection or even to protect him from concealed danger .The trespasser comes onto the premises at his own riskHowever , Lord Hailsham went on to deliver that an occupier could be liable in circumstances where the injury sustained was a result of a willful t urning reason to cause wrong to a trespasser . thus in for an occupier to have been liable for harm sustained by a trespasser the plaintiff was required to charge that the occupier took steps or conducted himself ` .with the deliberate intention of doing harm to the trespasser or .at least reckless disregard of the trespasser s presenceIn Glasgow tummy v Taylor [1922] 1 AC 44 the...If you indirect request to get a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper