Rank: Forum user 
|
I guess this is pretty similar to Andy's post but I would like to ask a question specifically around trespass.
Can anybody advice me what specific legislation would cover the above. We aquired some land to build a new building on and on that land was a derelict building that has been unused for a number of years. I was there doing an inspection last week and due to weather etc the condition of the inside is pretty bad. We have surrounded building with fencing, boarded up all doors, windows and skylights, erected warning signs that it is dangerous, but local kids are still finding ways in.
My concern is that somebody is seriously injured while inside the building and where I'm sure this comes underr HASAWA sect 3, I may be wrong and missing other legislation that applies.
First post for advice so be gentle
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
How about Occupiers Liability Act 57 and more specifically as amended 84? Jolley vs Sutton may be relevant
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Agree with Phil - Google "Occupiers Liability" and you will loads of information to help you. Occupiers Liability Acts 1957 & 1984.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Also take a look at civil case law (trespass is a civil matter).
- Herrington v British Railways Board
- Mann v Northern Electric Distribution Ltd
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I'd also keep records of what you are doing in terms of repairing the break ins etc Useful to be able to show you did everything reasonable to maintain security arrangements as well as put it up in the first place as both of these acts revolve around the tort of negligence.
57Act - generally for 'lawful' visitors
84Act - generally for others such as trespassers
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Although generally a civil tort, some acts of trespass are criminal offences such as raves and those under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
In addition to the OLA 1984, section 3 of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 will also apply if the landlord is a business.
Regards.
DJ.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Surprised no-one has mentioned Section 4 of HASAW 74 - Controllers of premises. In my view this is probably more onerous than Section 3 in respect of an empty premises.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Thank you all for your responses, I will ensure I refer to said Acts etc when I submit report
regards
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
kdrum
The other factor is to consider if there are any other special* risks in the building that might be a danger to those who trespass. Any special risks may require you to take further action to control the risks [you have already identified that children are finding there way in - bless-em. If they are exposed and harmed by these special risks you may be liable both for criminal and civil actions].
*asbestos lagging/open lift shafts/areas that might structurally collapse, etc.
Regards
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Chas - re post #8, the original question was about a derelict building and trespass, and I would therefore suggest that it is unlikely that S4 would apply as this section deals with the provision of a premises as a place of work or where plant and substances are provided for their use. More than happy to be wrong. I think that the primary statutory provision that would apply would be OLA although of course breach of OLA does not lead to the commission of a criminal offence but rather provides a means of civil redress.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act may be worth a look. Section 29.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Phil Rose wrote:Chas - re post #8, the original question was about a derelict building and trespass, and I would therefore suggest that it is unlikely that S4 would apply as this section deals with the provision of a premises as a place of work or where plant and substances are provided for their use. More than happy to be wrong. I think that the primary statutory provision that would apply would be OLA although of course breach of OLA does not lead to the commission of a criminal offence but rather provides a means of civil redress.
You may well be right but would not Section 4 apply if the Landlord was an employer, whether or not the particular premises derelict, even if it was a remote site not being used by employees. (In this case employees apparently visit to inspect).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.