Re: quad

Buddenbrooks wrote:

"Howard Neil" <hneil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:13p0s67ike8a677@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
What matters is whether the court accepts that a person has a duty of care to people who enter private property without invitation. In the UK, unfortunately, the courts do accept this.


Indeed but this should not be the case. Apart from sufficient access to permit safely anyone to ask permission or present a valid
reason for access there should be no presumption of safety or duty on the property owner. There should be provision to ensure that the boundary is clear and cannot be
entered without realizing that a boundary has been crossed, i.e. a fence, gate or hedge, and this boundary should be clear to children.
However if someone knowingly enters an area that he does not have permission or right to enter he should not expect any duty of care from the owner.

I remember that SA property laws required the police to forcibly remove anyone from property when asked by the registered landowner. Any rights the alleged trespassers had had to be settled afterwards in court. The total right to the land by the owner being the presumption, here it is the reverse in that the occupier is assumed to have greater rights than the owner.

It might seem harsh, but it did mean rental property was easy to find because landlords knew there was no difficulty in evicting tenants with no comeback if the lease had expired.

Here most farm gates are piled with unsightly building rubble as farmers are frightened of travelling folk taking residence. Even the local supermarket has barriers up at night leaving the road cluttered with lorries waiting for opening time to make deliveries.



I agree with your sentiments



--
Howard Neil
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: quad
    ... In the UK, unfortunately, the courts do accept this. ... However if someone knowingly enters an area that he does not have permission or right to enter he should not expect any duty of care from the owner. ... The total right to the land by the owner being the presumption, here it is the reverse in that the occupier is assumed to have greater rights than the owner. ... Here most farm gates are piled with unsightly building rubble as farmers are frightened of travelling folk taking residence. ...
    (uk.business.agriculture)
  • Vet Clinic Prices (Re: Urgent Purrs for Cara Please....)
    ... If it were at my hospital or at the emergency clinic where I pick up ... And then there's the post-operative care, Daily Doctor Exam, Daily IV ... just because someone has insurance. ... owner told us to do whatever we could to save the dog. ...
    (rec.pets.cats.anecdotes)
  • Re: Impaction: How long before death is immminent?
    ... It has EVERYTHING to do with protection of the State. ... your medical care as well. ... Bill, if the owner has to sign this agreement, how is it protecting the ... There are benefits of having two laws to protect horses. ...
    (rec.equestrian)
  • Re: Check out this HUGE array of pipes!
    ... It's like owner does not care. ... suggested a divorce or dept colleciton. ... Funny thing is that pipes are in reasonably good condition. ...
    (alt.smokers.pipes)
  • Re: I note that no one is mentioning Jim Bates this morning!
    ... don't care how right he is. ... a matter for the criminal courts. ... he is dishonest. ... the correct application of the law... ...
    (uk.legal)
Loading