|
L’s should ensure that T keeps the demised premises safe for visitors.
L will owe a duty of care to any visitor, with L having to take reasonable
steps to ensure that T keeps the premises safe. So, if L does not do
that, then L can be liable for T’s failure to make the premises safe.
This can be illustrated by a recent case, where the claimant slipped and
fell on wet petals that had fallen from the flowers of the florist on a
station forecourt. He sued the florist, and also the L of the railway
station. The argument was that L had failed to take sufficient steps to
ensure that T (the florist) had properly cleared up the spilled flowers. In
fact, it transpired that L had reprimanded T and the court took the view
that this was sufficient; there was no need, on the facts, for L to have
terminated T’s lease (or taken over the cleaning responsibilities
himself). So, as it turned out, L was not liable – but the case does
illustrate that L can potentially be liable, under Occupiers Liability Act
1957, to visitors to T’s premises. Piccolo v Chiltern Railway [2007]. © Practical Lawyer
|
|
October 2007 |
