Chapter 7 Self-test questions

. Prior to the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957, there were four categories of entrants onto land. To whom was the highest duty of care owed?

Invitee.

Uninvited person.

Contractor.

Licensee.

. Under the old law it was held that repeated trespass could confer a licence.

True

False

. The standard of duty owed under the 1957 Act, the 'common duty of care' is:

similar to that of the Donoghue v Stevenson neighbour principle.

stricter than that of the Donoghue v Stevenson neighbour principle.

not so strict as that of the Donoghue v Stevenson neighbour principle.

. Which of the following types of events would not be covered by the occupancy duty under the 1957 Act?

Installing glass in patio doors which is insufficiently thick, which then breaks and cuts a child.

Falseailing to cover a deep hole in the path leading to the front door, causing a visitor to injure his ankle when falling into the hole.

Failing to mop up a floor after a spillage in a shop, which then causes a customer to slip.

Negligently allowing a fire to start in a kitchen, which leads to the injury of a firefighter who is putting it out.

. Which of the following cases did not apply s.2(3)(a) of the 1957 Act?

Simkiss v Rhonda Borough Council

Roles v Nathan

Jolley v Sutton LBC

Phipps v Rochester Corporation

. What is required by the 1957 Act for a warning to discharge the occupier's duty of care?

That it be explicit as to the exact nature of the danger.

That it tell the visitor what he must do to avoid the danger.

That it be given to the visitor in advance of entry onto the premises.

That it be enough in all the circumstances to enable the visitor to be reasonably safe.

. Which of the following statements is not accurate regarding the occupier under the 1957 Act?

There is never more than one occupier of a given premises.

The definition of what is an occupier is not included in the 1957 Act.

The essence of the definition of occupation is control.

The occupier need not be present on the premises to have duties under the Act.

. Which of the following occupiers would be entitled to exclude liability under the 1957 Act?

A local authority landlord.

A domestic householder.

A shopkeeper.

The proprietor of a public swimming pool.

. A builder can be liable under statute if someone is injured due to the faulty construction of a premises.

True

False

. Which case established the duty of 'common humanity' to trespassers?

Addie & Sons v Dumbreck

Keown v Coventry Healthcare Trust

White v St Albans District CC

British Railways Board v Herrington

. Which statement best summarises the decision in Tomlinson v Congleton BC?

The Council was liable to the claimant under the 1984 Act because of its failure to properly warn him.

The Council was not liable to the claimant under the 1984 Act because the danger was obvious and the accident was caused by his own misjudgement.

The Council was not liable because the claimant was a trespasser rather than a visitor.

The Council was liable to the claimant because he was a child and extra care should have been taken on his behalf.

. Which of the aspects listed below constitutes a difference between the 1957 and 1984 Acts?

The duty concerns the state of the premises rather than activities taking place on it.

Risks willingly accepted by the entrant are not covered.

Warnings may in some cases discharge the duty of care.

The duty is owed in respect of physical injury and property damage.

Quiz Content