I have heard a lot of comments about removing snow from your path. i.e. if someone falls you can get prosecuted.
I know people tend to exaggerate and repeat what others have said to look smart. But what is the real truth behind this.
Please if you can give your answers with evidence if possibleWhat is the Law on clearing snow on your path?
Your skeptisism is well placed. They misinformation about this issue is reflected in the answers. bardic is broadly correct, 'Isitme' is just talking boll*cks - and you can't get prosecuted under the OLA 1957, it is a civil only matter.
The simple answer to your question is: no.
But you must differentiate between public and private land.
The legal obligation to maintain footways/pavements rests upon the highway authority (public roads) or the occupier (private premises).
It is settled authority (in the UK) that the presence of snow/ice does not render a road or pavement being in disrepair. It's presence is not actionable. Anyone who says otherwise is not a lawyer or not a lawyer you should instruct.
On private land, the OLA 1957 appleis and the wording has been set out in earlier answers. BUT, and this is the important bit, in clearing the snow, you have not (and CANNOT) assume legal responsibility for the pavement and you have not rendered yourself liable if it is private premsies.
Your friends may be, like some of the answerer's here, under the misapprehension that a lawyer can sue them for clearing a a path of snow, but they are sadly misinformed.
Probably too much Daily Mail reading. A mine of misinformation, prejudice and simple lies.What is the Law on clearing snow on your path?
The real truth is that under English law (and possibly Scottish law) the occupier has ';a duty to take such care as in all the circumstances of the case is reasonable to see that the visitor will be reasonably safe in using the premises for the purposes for which he is invited or permitted by the occupier to be there';.
The test applied is ';reasonable';. If your path is covered in snow it is reasonable to expect that any visitor should see this and expect it to be slippery. You should not do anything to the public footpath, that is not your responsibility and you should not interfere with it.
You're right to have doubts about some of the current crop of hysterical ';sue everybody'; misrepresentations of the truth.
The simple answer to your question is that there is no law on clearing snow from your footpath. Do it, don't do it, it's your footpath.
Someone slipping will not render you criminally liable and, despite numerous Daily Mail type claims, no one has ever cited a case to my knowledge where civil liability arises from someone slipping.
I can't give evidence of a law which doesn't exist but would say that neither of the OLAs cover snow.
The Occupiers Liability Acts of 1957 and 1984 state that action has to be taken to afford visitors safe passage.
Prosecutions under the acts are extremely rare though.
With regards to public footpaths, under the Highways Act 1980, you can claim against the council, but ONLY if you've previously obtained a court order telling them the path needs clearing. It's neglect of the court order you take action against.
If you want a clear and precise answer you would at least have to state what COUNTRY you are talking about.
ANY answer you got without this information is a guess.
A couple notes. very unlikely you would be prosecuted. Injury due to negligence is a tort - a civil law issue not criminal in the US and likely in many other countries as well. Any tort law issues would be subject to the country and local area as well as local court precedence.
I think ';isitme'; is correct. Snow is a danger, so the occupier has the duty to remove and make safe the pavement.
The short answer is there isn't any specific law or regulation.
What there is, is the possibility of being sued should someone suffer an accident for which you are partly or wholly responsible, the outcome of which would be based on the balance of probabilities.
So someone slips on your path and breaks an arm, we'll say. If you had done nothing to clear the snow they might argue that you had a duty to clear the snow as it presented an obvious hazard, you would argue that it was obvious the path was slippery and the person should have taken more care. Further arguments could be about the practicality of clearing the path, the ongoing weather, etc. etc. It would be a toss up as to whether you were found liable and to what extent, but the probability is that you would not be found liable.
Had you cleared the path and the uncovered surface had iced over then the person might well claim that they had expected you had properly cleared the path and salted it to stop icing. It might well be found that such an expectation was reasonable and your lack of attention is more the cause than the persons inattention, but again the probability is that you would not be found liable, however this is the UK so no-one can really judge the outcome in such cases.
as i know it if u clear the snow/ice away from your path/outside your house on the pavement then if someone falls etc then you can be sued for it but if you leave it where it is and they trip then the person can do nothing about it.
i'm afraid i know nothing on the actual law side of things tho, try googling the subject and see what you come up with
It is true, you can sue someone if you have fallen over and hurt yourself, if they have in any way disturbed the snow. That's why teachers have to be careful at school.
It is best just to leave the snow unless it is vital that your path or drive is cleared.
Nobody is legally responsible for the weather , if it were otherwise people could sue Government because they got wet while walking in the rain . Salt gritting is nothing more than complimentary service there is no legal requirement and no obligation whatsoever . The individual is charged with a duty to conduct themselves in a safe manner at all times .
No comments:
Post a Comment