Occupiers' liability - Definition of 'visitor

Learning Outcomes

This article outlines how to determine visitor status under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957, including:

• the statutory concept and definition of "visitor" and its role as gateway to liability
• how express permission is created, limited, and evidenced in problem questions
• how implied permission arises from conduct, custom or acquiescence, and how it can be restricted
• the effect of contractual rights of entry, including paying customers and hotel or ticketed guests
• the position of entrants with a legal right of entry, such as police and emergency services
• how conditions of time, place and purpose confine visitor status and shape occupiers' duties
• how and when permission is revoked, and the mechanics of instantaneous status changes
• the legal consequences of exceeding permission, including transition to trespasser and application of the OLA 1984
• the treatment of children and skilled visitors when assessing standard of care owed to visitors
• how to apply visitor status rules step-by-step to structured SQE1 problem scenarios
• recurring exam traps, such as confusing warnings with revocation or assuming everyone on premises is a visitor

SQE1 Syllabus

For SQE1, you are required to understand the legal definition of "visitor" for the purposes of occupiers' liability, and how this affects the duty of care owed by occupiers, with a focus on the following syllabus points:

• the statutory definition of "visitor" under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957
• the distinction between express and implied permission
• the effect of legal rights of entry (e.g., police, emergency services)
• how exceeding permission changes status from visitor to trespasser
• the practical implications for occupiers' liability and exam scenarios
• the way conditions (time, place, purpose) limit permission and how revocation operates
• the inclusion of contractual and statutory right entrants as visitors
• the immediate consequences of status change for the applicable duty (OLA 1957 vs OLA 1984)

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. Which of the following is NOT a "visitor" under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957?
   1. A customer in a shop during opening hours
   2. A postal worker delivering mail
   3. A person entering a "Staff Only" area without permission
   4. A police officer entering with a warrant

2. True or false? Implied permission can arise if an occupier knows people regularly cross their land and does nothing to stop them.

3. If a person enters a property with permission but then exceeds that permission, what is their legal status for occupiers' liability purposes?

4. Which section of the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 states that occupiers owe a duty to "visitors"?

Introduction

The Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 sets out the duty of care owed by occupiers to "visitors" on their premises. Understanding who qualifies as a visitor is essential for determining the extent of an occupier's liability. This article explains the statutory definition of "visitor," the difference between express and implied permission, and the impact of legal rights of entry. It also covers what happens when someone exceeds their permission and becomes a trespasser. The old common law categories of “invitees” and “licensees” were abolished by the Act; today, all lawful entrants are treated uniformly as “visitors,” to whom the occupier owes the common duty of care in section 2(2) to take reasonable care to see that they are reasonably safe for the permitted purposes.

Key Term: visitor
A person who has express or implied permission to enter or use premises, or who enters under a legal right (including under a contract or statutory authority), for the purposes of the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957.

Who is a "Visitor" under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957?

The Act regulates the duty owed by occupiers to those lawfully on their premises. The duty is only owed to "visitors." Identifying visitor status is the first step in any occupiers' liability question. Two overarching principles frame this assessment:

• A person is a visitor if the occupier invites or permits them onto the premises (expressly or impliedly), or if they enter by virtue of a right conferred by law (for example, under warrant or a statutory power).
• Permission can be limited by conditions of time, place and purpose. Exceeding those conditions, or remaining after permission has been withdrawn, immediately converts the person’s status to trespasser.

The statutory concept of visitor includes:

• persons with express permission (e.g., invited guests, customers)
• persons with implied permission (e.g., normal social/commercial approaches to a front door)
• persons entering under a contract (e.g., paying customers, hotel guests)
• persons entering under a legal right (e.g., police with warrant, emergency services responding)

Express Permission

A person is a visitor if the occupier gives them clear, express permission to enter. This can be verbal, written, or by obvious conduct. Express permission is often subject to conditions (for example, “during opening hours,” “in the public areas only,” or “for the purpose of repair”).

Examples:

• A friend invited to your house for dinner
• A customer entering a shop during business hours
• A contractor hired to carry out repairs

Permission defined expressly is often limited to specific areas and purposes. If the occupier allows entry to a café’s seating area, that does not, without more, allow entry to the kitchen or staff-only rooms. Express permission can also be conditional on compliance with posted rules; breach of a clear condition can revoke permission.

Implied Permission

Implied permission arises where the occupier's conduct, or the circumstances, indicate that entry is permitted, even if not expressly stated. The Act recognises implied permission to cover day-to-day social and commercial approaches to premises, and routine community uses the occupier knows about and does not object to.

Examples:

• Postal workers delivering mail
• Delivery drivers approaching a front door
• Members of the public using a path across land with the occupier's knowledge and no objection

Implied permission can be revoked or restricted. A prominent sign at the entrance stating “No canvassers or salespeople” usually removes implied permission for those purposes. In contrast, a sign restricting hours (“Park closes at 6pm”) limits the time dimension of permission; entry after that time falls outside permission and converts status to trespasser. The occupier’s knowledge and tolerance of regular use can create an implied licence, but a reasonable step to object or restrict—such as a gate, notices, or fencing—will curtail it.

Key Term: implied permission
Permission to enter premises that is not expressly given but is inferred from the occupier's conduct or the circumstances.

Key Term: express permission
Clear, direct permission given by the occupier for someone to enter or use the premises.

Legal Right of Entry

Some people have a statutory or common law right to enter premises, regardless of the occupier's wishes. The Act treats such entrants as visitors for the purposes of the common duty of care. This category includes, for example:

• Police officers entering with a valid warrant or exercising lawful powers
• Firefighters or paramedics responding to an emergency
• Utility workers acting under statutory authority (for inspection, maintenance)

The occupier cannot lawfully obstruct exercise of such rights of entry, and cannot by notice exclude the duty owed to them for death or personal injury. Their status as visitors does not depend on the occupier’s consent but on the existence of the right.

Key Term: legal right of entry
A right granted by law to enter premises, regardless of the occupier's consent.

Contractual Visitors

The Act makes clear that entrants under the terms of a contract (for example, paying hotel guests, ticket-holders at a cinema, or customers in a car park) are treated as visitors. The occupier’s duty applies to the premises provided for the contractual purpose. Contractual terms cannot exclude liability for death or personal injury caused by negligence to consumer visitors; business-to-business exclusions are subject to reasonableness tests.

Conditions on Permission: Time, Place and Purpose

Permission may be limited along three axes:

• Time: “Open 9am–5pm” or “No entry after closing.”
• Place: “Public areas only” or “No entry beyond this point.”
• Purpose: “For viewing, no photography,” “Service entrance for deliveries only.”

A person is a visitor only while acting within the scope of these conditions. A café customer is a visitor in the seating area during opening hours; if they return after closing or enter the kitchen, they exceed permission. Similarly, a person invited to view a property is a visitor for that purpose; entering locked rooms or returning to take photographs in breach of posted restrictions may exceed permission.

Exceeding Permission: When a Visitor Becomes a Trespasser

A visitor who goes beyond the scope of their permission (e.g., entering a prohibited area, staying beyond permitted times, or using the premises for a prohibited purpose) loses visitor status and becomes a trespasser. The occupier's duty of care is then reduced and governed by the Occupiers' Liability Act 1984 (personal injury only). Status can change instantaneously. Revocation can be explicit (“Please leave now”) or implied (closing time, clear barrier, “No entry” sign).

Three common ways permission is exceeded:

• Place: entering “Staff Only” or locked areas
• Time: staying after closing or posted curfew
• Purpose: using the premises for a prohibited or unlawful purpose (e.g., climbing displays, tampering with stock)

Key Term: trespasser
A person who enters or remains on premises without any express or implied permission, or who exceeds the permission given.

Worked Example 1.1

Scenario:
A customer in a supermarket enters a door marked "Staff Only" to look for the toilet. While inside, they slip and are injured. Are they a visitor or a trespasser?

Answer:
The customer was a visitor while in the public areas of the supermarket. By entering the "Staff Only" area, they exceeded their permission and became a trespasser. The occupier owes only a limited duty under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1984 for injuries in that area.

Special Categories of Visitors

Children

Occupiers must be prepared for children to be less careful than adults. The standard of care is higher where children are involved, and occupiers should anticipate risks that may not be obvious to a child. A hazard that would be obvious to an adult may constitute a concealed danger to a seven-year-old. Attractive features (“allurements,” such as bright berries, ponds, or play equipment) require particular care, and warning signs alone may not be sufficient protection for very young children who cannot read. Parental responsibility is also relevant: where very young children enter areas where a prudent parent would not allow them to wander unaccompanied, the occupier may meet their duty by making the premises reasonably safe for an accompanied child.

Skilled Visitors

Professionals (e.g., electricians, plumbers) are expected to guard against risks related to their work. The occupier may expect them to take appropriate precautions for dangers ordinarily incident to their calling. The standard of care owed to such visitors is correspondingly tempered: a skilled technician is expected to recognise and protect against technical risks in the job, while the occupier remains responsible for hazards outside the visitor’s skill or remit.

Worked Example 1.2

Scenario:
A gas engineer is called to repair a boiler and is injured by a hazard unrelated to their work (e.g., a loose floorboard). Is the occupier liable?

Answer:
The occupier may expect the engineer to guard against risks associated with gas work, but not unrelated hazards like a loose floorboard. The occupier could be liable for injuries caused by dangers outside the engineer's professional knowledge.

Worked Example 1.3

Scenario:
A sales representative walks past a large sign at the gate stating “No canvassers or salespeople” and approaches the front door. As they step on the porch, a broken tread gives way and they are injured. Are they a visitor?

Answer:
No. The occupier’s clear notice revoked implied permission for canvassing. The representative entered without permission and was a trespasser. The OLA 1984 duty (for personal injury only) may apply if the risk was one against which, in the circumstances, the occupier could reasonably be expected to offer protection, but they were not a visitor under the 1957 Act.

Worked Example 1.4

Scenario:
A customer lawfully in a shop goes behind the counter to reach into the till and is injured by a protruding nail.

Answer:
The customer exceeded the scope of permission by entering a non-public area and by using the premises for an unlawful purpose. Their status changed to trespasser. The common duty of care in the 1957 Act does not apply in that area; the lower duty in the 1984 Act governs.

Status Changes: Practical Triggers and Consequences

• Entering beyond barriers or “No entry” signs: immediate status change to trespasser
• Staying after closing: status change once permission ends (for example, when doors are locked or closing is announced)
• Ignoring a specific instruction to leave: status change upon refusal
• Breaching a known condition (e.g., “no drones,” “no climbing”): status change for the prohibited activity or area

When status changes, so does the applicable duty:

• Visitor: common duty of care in OLA 1957 (reasonable safety for permitted purposes; property damage and personal injury covered)
• Trespasser: duty under OLA 1984 (reasonable steps to protect against risks the occupier knows about or ought to know about; personal injury only)

Contract and Consumer Dimensions

Contractual entrants (e.g., paying guests, ticket holders) are visitors. The occupier’s duty extends to areas and facilities provided under the contract. Exclusion notices cannot, in consumer contexts, exclude liability for death or personal injury caused by negligence. For property damage, business occupiers may attempt exclusions subject to statutory controls. This does not alter who is a visitor, but it affects the remedies and defences if breach is alleged.

Interactions with Warnings and Revocation

Warnings do not create permission; they manage risk for those who already have permission. However, notices can revoke or limit implied permission (e.g., “Private—No public access,” “No canvassers”), alter the time dimension (“Park closes at 6pm”), or restrict the purpose (“Deliveries only”). A warning is about risk; a limitation or “no entry” notice is about permission. The former may help discharge the duty to visitors; the latter can prevent status arising or convert status to trespasser.

Worked Example 1.5

Scenario:
Police officers enter a property to execute a valid warrant and a poorly secured balcony rail fails, causing injury. Are the officers visitors?

Answer:
Yes. Officers exercising a lawful right of entry are treated as visitors for the purposes of the OLA 1957. The occupier owes the common duty of care to take reasonable steps to keep them reasonably safe for the permitted purpose.

Exam Warning

A common exam mistake is to assume that anyone on premises is a visitor. Always check if the person had express or implied permission, or a legal right of entry, and whether they exceeded that permission. Pay close attention to conditions of time, place and purpose and any posted restrictions. A sign can revoke implied permission; crossing a barrier or entering “Staff Only” usually converts status to trespasser immediately.

Revision Tip

If a person starts as a visitor but exceeds their permission (e.g., stays after closing time or enters a prohibited area), their status changes to trespasser. The occupier's duty of care is then limited. Use the quick triage: Determine status (visitor vs trespasser), identify the applicable Act (1957 vs 1984), and then assess duty and breach accordingly.

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• The definition of "visitor" under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 is based on express or implied permission, or legal right of entry (including contractual entrants).
• Express permission is clear consent from the occupier; implied permission is inferred from conduct or circumstances and can be revoked or restricted (e.g., by signs).
• Certain people have a statutory or common law right to enter premises and are treated as visitors (e.g., police with warrant, emergency services); occupiers cannot exclude the duty for death or personal injury in consumer contexts.
• Permission may be limited by conditions of time, place and purpose. Exceeding the scope of permission turns a visitor into a trespasser, triggering the lower duty under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984.
• Special rules apply to children and skilled visitors regarding the standard of care owed (higher vigilance for children; tempered duty for risks incident to skilled work).
• Warnings manage risk for visitors; “no entry” or restriction notices manage permission. Distinguishing warnings from revocation helps determine status.
• Contractual visitors are covered by the Act; exclusion of liability for death or personal injury caused by negligence cannot be used against consumers.

Key Terms and Concepts

• visitor
• implied permission
• express permission
• legal right of entry
• trespasser