000			01775cab a2200325 4500
001			ABS68468
008			041117n2004 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u128016
100			_aSproull, N.
245			_aTrespass impasse
260			_c2004
490			_aSolicitors' Journal _v148(38) 8 October 2004, 1136-1137(2)
520			_aDiscusses the impact of several cases examining the issue of personal injury to adult trespassers. States the judge in "Ratcliff v G R McConnell" ([1997] EWCA Civ 2679, [1999] 1 WLR 670) had found Canadian case "Veinot" ([1975] 2 SCR 311), was the only reported case in which an adult trespasser had succeeded in bringing a claim for personal injury. Highlights the three-fold test included in the Occupier's Liability Act 1984 which states the claimant must show first that the defendant was aware of the danger which caused the injury, that he/she knew or had reasonable grounds to believe that the claimant was in the vicinity of the danger or might come within the vicinity and that the risk is one against which it is reasonable to offer some protection. Illustrates the application of this test with a number of cases. Concludes the Court of Appeal remains hostile to claimants.
590			_aABS
590			_aABS
650			_aRATCLIFF V MCCONNEL
650			_aVEINOT
650			_aSWAIN V PURI
650			_aDONOGHUE V FOLKESTONE PROPERTIES LTD
650			_aTOMLINSON V CONGLETON BC
650			_aGABRIEL V KIRKLEES MBC
650			_aRHIND V ASTBURY WATER PARK LTD AND ANOTHER
650			_aHIGGS V FOSTER
650			_aJOLLEY V SUTTON LBC
650			_aOCCUPIERS LIABILITY ACT 1984
650			_aTRESPASSING
650			_aPERSONAL INJURY
690			_aPROPERTY AND LAND LAW-CASE LAW
942			_n0
999			_c74603 _d74603