Previous Page  214 / 424 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 214 / 424 Next Page
Page Background

GAZETTE

JULY 1995

that person unless a court determines

otherwise in the interests of justice.

Attempted offences are also covered

(section 4 ( 3) of the Act).

Modification of Occupiers' Duty to

Entrants

Occupiers may restrict, modify or

exclude the level of the duty which

they would normally owe to

visitors

by express agreement or notice,

provided they act reasonably in so

doing and, where a notice is involved,

the occupier must take reasonable

steps to bring the notice to the

attention of visitors. If the notice is

prominently displayed at the normal

means of access to the premises, that

will be

prima facie

evidence that the

occupier has taken reasonable steps to

bring it to the visitor's attention

(section 5 ( 2) of the Act).

The Occupiers' Liability Act, 1995

illustrates the importance of notices

in modifying the duty of occupiers to

entrants: notices will have to be

simple, clear, reasonable and placed

in prominent positions.

Any such restriction, modification or

exclusion, however, will not allow an

occupier to injure a visitor

intentionally or to act with

reckless

disregard

for a visitor or the property

of a visitor.

In relation to a danger existing on

premises, and in the context of the

duty not to act with reckless disregard

for the person or the property of a

recreational user or a trespasser, in

determining whether or not an

occupier has acted with reckless

disregard, regard will be had to

several circumstances including

"the nature of any warning given by

the occupier or another person of

the danger" (section 4 ( 2 ) ( h) of

the Act).

However, there is a proviso in section

4 of the 1995 Act that where a

structure on premises is or has been

provided for use primarily by

recreational users, the occupier shall

owe a duty towards such users in

respect of such a structure to take

reasonable care to maintain the

structure in a safe condition, provided

that, where a stile, gate, footbridge or

other similar structure on premises is

or has been provided

not

for use

primarily by recreational users, the

occupier's duty towards a recreational

user thereof in respect of such

structure shall not be so extended.

An occupier who has taken all

reasonable care when engaging an

independent contractor will not be

liable for injury or damage caused to

an entrant by the contractor's

negligence unless the occupier knows,

or ought to know, that the work has

not been properly done (section 7 of

the Act).

Both common law and statutory

provisions are preserved in the 1995

Act which impose responsibilities on

particular classes of occupiers, for

example, hotel proprietors, which are

greater than those imposed by the

1995 Act. The Act also preserves the

liability of occupiers under the present

law for certain duties which they

cannot delegate to independent

contractors, for example, duties in

relation to work which is inherently

dangerous.

The Importance of Notices

The 1995 Act illustrates the

importance of notices. Many of us

have seen notices such as "Private:

Trespassers will be prosecuted: By

Order". In a chapter on trespassers,

licensees and invitees, a writer once

introduced the topic of the above

notice with a quotation from

Tristram

Shandy.

"Said my mother, 'Wha t 's all this

story about?'

- 'A cock and a bull,' said Yo r i c k ."

In practice, the notice "Trespassers

will be prosecuted" had little

significance. Trespass was, in general,

a tort giving rise to civil proceedings.

Notices will have to be simple, clear,

reasonable, placed in prominent

positions and carefully drafted to

enable occupiers to restrict, modify or

exclude their duties under the 1995

Act.

Compensat ion

Fund Payments

- May, 1995

The following claim amounts were

admitted by the Compensation Fund

Committee and approved for payment

by the Council at its meeting in May

1995.

IR£

Jonathan

P. T. Brooks,

7 2 , 1 1 1 . 32

17/18 Nassau Street,

Dublin 2.

John K. Brennan,

6 5 0 . 00

Mayfield,

Enniscorthy,

Co. Wexford.

Malocco

& Killeen,

1 8 5 , 0 0 0 . 00

Chatham House,

Chatham Street,

Dublin 2.

Michael

Collier,

1,620.35

2 Ross Terrace,

Malahide,

Co. Dublin.

Michael

Dunne,

1 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 00

63/65 Main Street,

Blackrock,

Co. Dublin.

3 5 9 , 3 8 1 . 67

Compensat ion

Fund Payments

- June, 1995

The following claim amounts were

admitted by the Compensation Fund

Committee and approved for payment

by the Council at its meeting in June

1995.

IR£

John K Brennan,

1 , 5 2 7 . 92

Mayfield,

Enniscorthy,

Co Wexford.

Jonathan

P. T. Brooks,

4 6 0 . 00

17/18 Nassau Street,

Dublin 2.

1 , 9 8 7 . 92

190