#cases #occupiers-liability #tort

Wheat v E. Lacon & Co. Ltd. [1966] AC 552

Facts: The defendants were the owners of a pub. They granted Mr and Mrs Richardson, the manager and his wife, a licence to use the top floor of the premises for their private accommodation and to take in paying guests. The plaintiff and her husband were paying guests. The husband was fatally injured while using the staircase which had a faulty hand rail. He could not see this as the area had no lighting (the light bulb was missing). The question arose as to who was in occupation of the stairs on which the plaintiff was injured, for the purpose of a claim in occupiers’ liability.
The court held that both the defendant owners and Mr and Mrs Richardson were occupiers and that both therefore owed a duty of care. In the event, neither were liable because the fatality was caused partly as a result of a light bulb having been removed by a third party, over which the occupiers had no control. So the claim failed at the legal causation stage. Lord Denning’s description of the occupier being any person with a sufficient degree of control over the premises remains the key test for determining the occupier. Note the four specific examples of the occupier that Lord Denning provides. As to his fourth example, Lord Denning states that generally the occupier will remain responsible if he hires independent contractors. It is, however, possible for independent contractors to be occupiers or to be dual occupiers (AMF International Ltd v Magnet Bowling Ltd [1968] 1 WLR 1028). Where no-one has sufficient control over the premises, the claim in occupiers’ liability will necessarily fail, as it did in the next case.