Smith v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd
An occupier is not generally liable for damage caused to neighbouring property by trespassers who enter its land, unless it knew or ought to have known of a specific risk.
Facts
Littlewoods bought a cinema in Dunfermline, intending to demolish it and build a supermarket. The cinema stood empty, and children and others broke in several times, although Littlewoods did not know this. Vandals started a fire in the cinema, which spread and damaged neighbouring buildings. The owners of those buildings sued Littlewoods in negligence.
Legal principle
The House of Lords held that Littlewoods was not liable. Lord Goff said that there is no general duty to prevent third parties from causing damage to others, but that liability may arise in special circumstances, such as where the defender has a special relationship with the third party, or has negligently caused a source of danger which it is reasonably foreseeable that third parties may interfere with, or knows or has the means of knowing that trespassers are creating a risk of fire on its property and fails to take reasonable steps to abate it. Littlewoods did not know of the break ins or the previous fires, and an empty cinema was not an obvious source of danger.
Related cases on duty of care
- Anns v Merton London Borough Council [1978] AC 728
- Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605
- Capital & Counties plc v Hampshire County Council [1997] QB 1004
- Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust [2018] UKSC 50, [2019] AC 831
- Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562
- Gorringe v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council [2004] UKHL 15, [2004] 1 WLR 1057
- Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [1989] AC 53
- Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd [1970] AC 1004
Studying tort law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
