This guide is maintained as a current resource for September 2026 and covers only the laws of England and Wales. Information is for general guidance, not legal advice. Consult a qualified solicitor for advice specific to your situation.
Learn what duty occupiers owe to non‑visitors under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1984 in England and Wales, including when the duty arises, how it differs from visitor duties, statutory conditions, practical examples and limitations in public liability claims.
In public liability law in England and Wales, occupiers of land or premises owe clear duties to people who enter with permission - known as visitors - under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957. However, the law also recognises that people without permission, such as trespassers and other non‑visitors, may suffer injury due to dangers on someone's property. Since the early 1970s, the courts and Parliament have developed a legal framework that imposes a limited duty on occupiers to protect certain non‑visitors from foreseeable harm. The primary legislation governing this duty is the Occupiers' Liability Act 1984.
This article explains what duty occupiers owe to non‑visitors, when that duty applies, how it differs from the duty to lawful visitors, and the practical context for claims involving people on premises without invitation.
Introduction to Non‑Visitors and Occupiers' Liability
A non‑visitor under public liability law is someone who enters land or premises without lawful authority, permission or invitation. This typically includes trespassers but may also extend to people who enter lawful premises for unauthorised purposes or in areas where they are not permitted to be. Unlike visitors, non‑visitors do not benefit from the broad duty of care imposed by the 1957 Act; instead, they fall within the narrower statutory duty created by the Occupiers' Liability Act 1984 (OLA 1984).
The 1984 Act was introduced to clarify and codify the limited duty of care that occupiers owe to non‑visitors in circumstances where there is a known danger and the presence of unauthorised entrants is foreseeable. Prior to the Act, liability to trespassers was uncertain following older common law rules.
Statutory Duty Under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1984
When a Duty Arises
Section 1 of the 1984 Act sets out the conditions under which an occupier owes a duty to a non‑visitor. An occupier only owes a duty if all three statutory conditions below are met:
- Awareness of the danger: The occupier is aware of a site hazard or has reasonable grounds to believe it exists.
- Knowledge of presence or likely presence: The occupier knows, or has reasonable grounds to believe, that a non‑visitor is in the vicinity of that danger or may come into the vicinity.
- Reasonable expectation to protect: The risk is one against which the occupier may reasonably be expected to offer some protection in all the circumstances of the case.
These criteria reflect an objective assessment: the law looks at what the occupier knew or ought to have known, and whether protecting against the danger was reasonable.
Duty Itself
If the statutory conditions are met, the occupier's duty is to take such care as is reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure that the non‑visitor does not suffer injury by reason of the danger concerned. This duty is narrower than the duty owed to lawful visitors: it is limited to personal injury (including death) and does not extend to injury to property brought onto the premises by the non‑visitor.
Discharging the Duty
An occupier may discharge this duty by taking reasonable steps to give warning of the danger or discourage people from entering the hazardous area. This might include signage, barriers or other practical measures appropriate to the risk. What constitutes “reasonable” depends on the context, including the foreseeability of non‑visitor entry and the nature of the danger.
How Duty to Non‑Visitors Differs from Duty to Visitors
The duty owed to visitors under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 is broader. Occupiers must take reasonable care to ensure that visitors are reasonably safe in using the premises for purposes for which they are invited or permitted. This duty applies automatically to visitors regardless of the occupier's knowledge of specific hazards.
In contrast, under the 1984 Act:
- The duty does not arise automatically for non‑visitors; all three statutory conditions must be satisfied.
- The duty is limited to personal injury and does not cover damage to property.
- Occupiers may only owe a duty where it is foreseeable that non‑visitors may encounter a known danger.
Because of these limitations, the law imposes a less onerous duty on occupiers toward non‑visitors than toward lawful visitors. This balance recognises that occupiers are not required to make their land completely safe for people who enter without authority, but should still take reasonable steps when risks are foreseeable.
Common Situations Where Duty May Apply
Occupiers may owe a duty under the 1984 Act in circumstances such as:
- Derelict or fenced sites where people are known to trespass despite warnings.
- Abandoned buildings or structures with known hazards near public access points.
- Water features or pits on land where people - including non‑visitors - have frequently entered.
If an occupier knows, or ought to know, that people regularly enter a hazardous area, reasonable precautions such as warnings, fencing or removing the danger may be expected.
Limitations and Defences
No Duty Without Knowledge
If the occupier is genuinely unaware of the danger and has no reasonable grounds to believe that non‑visitors may come near it, no duty will arise under the 1984 Act. A non‑visitor's claim in such circumstances is unlikely to succeed.
Obvious Dangers and Voluntary Assumption of Risk
Where the danger is obvious and the non‑visitor voluntarily assumes the risk, the duty may be reduced or negated. For example, clear warnings or inherently hazardous natural features (such as cliffs or deep water) may limit occupier liability if the non‑visitor's conduct shows conscious acceptance of the risk.
No Property Damage Claims
Unlike visitor claims under the 1957 Act, the 1984 Act only covers personal injury. A non‑visitor cannot claim for damage to their personal property arising from the state of the premises.
Practical Considerations
Evidence and Risk Assessment
Establishing liability for a non‑visitor under the 1984 Act typically requires evidence showing:
- The occupier knew or reasonably should have known about the danger.
- The occupier knew, or should have foreseen, that people might come into the vicinity of that danger.
- The occupier failed to take reasonable steps to mitigate the risk or provide warnings.
Photographs, maintenance records, reports of prior trespass incidents, and expert risk assessments can all contribute to establishing these elements.
Time Limits for Claims
Non‑visitor personal injury claims largely follow the standard limitation rules for negligence claims. In general, claimants must issue a claim within three years of the date of injury or the date when they first knew the injury was significant and caused by the premises. Failure to observe limitation periods can bar a claim unless the court grants an extension in exceptional circumstances. (Standard personal injury limitation period under the Limitation Act 1980)
Key Takeaways
Under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1984, occupiers of land and premises in England and Wales may owe a limited duty of care to non‑visitors, such as trespassers, where:
- They are aware of a hazard or reasonably should be.
- They know or reasonably should believe a non‑visitor is in the vicinity of, or may come into the vicinity of, that danger.
- The risk is one against which it is reasonable to expect them to offer some protection.
The duty requires reasonable care to prevent injury but is narrower than the duty owed to lawful visitors and does not cover property damage. Understanding these statutory conditions and practical implications helps claimants and solicitors assess liability and the prospects of claims involving non‑visitors.
