0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

Forgotten your password?

Clare v Roderick W P Perry t/a Widemouth Manor Hotel, Court of Appeal, 13 January 2005

28 January 2005
The issues

Occupier’s Liability – Claimant injuring himself when jumping from wall

The facts

The Claimant hurt herself when trying to leave the Defendant’s hotel which she had attended with her partner. They had tried to leave by means of a retaining wall that was next to the road. There was a proper exit nearby. Her partner had successfully climbed form the wall down to the road but the Claimant had not realised that there was a 6 foot drop on the other side. It had been late at night and it was too dark for her to see. As she jumped over the wall she injured herself.

The Trial Judge found for the Claimant on the basis that the Defendant had failed to fence the area off although he made a finding of contributory negligence. The Defendant appealed.

The decision

The risk of an accidental fall was a different risk in character to a deliberate act of jumping from a wall.

The occupier did not have a duty to prevent a risk that was different in kind from that which had been identified. See Darby v The National Trust.

The Judge had found that had the Claimant taken steps to prevent an accidental fall those steps would also have prevented the Claimant from deliberately jumping. However, in the light of Derby the Judge’s findings could not be upheld. Moreover an occupier had to have regard to behaviour reasonably expected of a visitor and in this case the Claimant’s conduct had been foolish. Appeal allowed.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm)

This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.


Legal updates

Assessing the scope of employers liability – Chell v Tarmac

These were the opening remarks of Mr Justice Martin Spencer when handing down his Judgment in the recent case of Andrew Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Limited [2020] EWHC 2613, the latest in a series of appeals dealing with the scope of vicarious liability.


Legal updates

Non-payment of insurance premiums during the Coronavirus pandemic

The forced closure of many businesses as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic has had a huge impact on the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Recent reports from the Office for National Statistics state that the economy was 25% smaller in April than it was in February this year.


Legal updates

Reinstatement for property damage losses – when does it apply?

The Court of Appeal has recently considered the correct test for measuring the indemnity for property damage losses and has provided useful guidance on whether an insured needs to intend to reinstate the property to its pre-loss condition.


The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up