FE-1 Tort Law 2 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1995 (Ireland), what duty is owed to a visitor?
- The occupier owes a duty to take reasonable care for the visitor's safety in respect of dangers arising from the state of the premises or from activities carried out (Correct answer)
- The occupier owes absolute liability to all persons entering their premises
- No duty is owed to visitors who are adults
- The duty under the 1995 Act only applies to commercial premises
Correct answer: The occupier owes a duty to take reasonable care for the visitor's safety in respect of dangers arising from the state of the premises or from activities carried out
Under section 3 of the Occupiers' Liability Act 1995, occupiers owe visitors a duty of reasonable care. The duty varies for visitors (highest), recreational users and trespassers (duty not to injure recklessly or intentionally). This replaced the old common law categories.
Question 2: What is the distinction between defamation per se and defamation per quod in Irish law under the Defamation Act 2009?
- The Defamation Act 2009 abolished the per se/per quod distinction — all defamation requires proof that the statement was published to a third party, was defamatory, and referred to the plaintiff (Correct answer)
- Defamation per se requires proof of special damage while per quod does not
- The 2009 Act only applies to internet publications
- Defamation per se was abolished while per quod remains
Correct answer: The Defamation Act 2009 abolished the per se/per quod distinction — all defamation requires proof that the statement was published to a third party, was defamatory, and referred to the plaintiff
The Defamation Act 2009 reformed Irish defamation law. A statement is defamatory if it would tend to injure the reputation of the person by holding them up to hatred, ridicule, or contempt or causing them to be shunned. Truth is a complete defence.
Question 3: What is the tort of private nuisance and how is it established in Irish law?
- An indirect interference with a person's use and enjoyment of their land that is unreasonable in the circumstances — balancing the severity, duration, and character of the neighbourhood (Correct answer)
- Any activity that disturbs a neighbour is a nuisance
- Private nuisance requires proof of actual physical damage to land
- The tort was abolished by the Environment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2011
Correct answer: An indirect interference with a person's use and enjoyment of their land that is unreasonable in the circumstances — balancing the severity, duration, and character of the neighbourhood
Private nuisance protects the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of land from indirect interference. The interference must be unreasonable, assessed by balancing: character of neighbourhood, duration, severity, and whether the defendant took reasonable steps to minimise impact.
Question 4: Under the Statute of Limitations 1957 (as amended), what is the general limitation period for a personal injury claim in Ireland?
- Two years from the date of accrual of the cause of action or the date of knowledge, whichever is later, under the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act and amendments (Correct answer)
- Six years
- One year
- Four years
Correct answer: Two years from the date of accrual of the cause of action or the date of knowledge, whichever is later, under the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act and amendments
Following the Civil Liability and Courts Act 2004 and related amendments, the general limitation period for personal injury in Ireland is two years from the date of accrual or date of knowledge. The Statute of Limitations 1957 general period of six years applies to property damage and contract.
Question 5: What is Rylands v Fletcher [1868] liability and how has it been treated in Irish law?
- Strict liability arises where a person brings onto their land something likely to do mischief if it escapes — if it escapes and causes damage, they are liable without proof of negligence, though its application is narrow in Ireland (Correct answer)
- Rylands v Fletcher was rejected by Irish courts and has no application in Ireland
- The rule applies to all activities on land without restriction
- Rylands v Fletcher only applies to water escaping from land
Correct answer: Strict liability arises where a person brings onto their land something likely to do mischief if it escapes — if it escapes and causes damage, they are liable without proof of negligence, though its application is narrow in Ireland
Rylands v Fletcher imposes strict liability for non-natural use of land where something brought onto the land escapes and causes damage. Irish courts have applied it narrowly. The rule has been absorbed into negligence in some jurisdictions but remains as a separate tort in Irish law.
Question 6: What is the 'eggshell skull' rule in Irish tort law?
- A defendant must take their victim as they find them — if the plaintiff has a pre-existing vulnerability that causes unusually severe damage from the breach, the defendant is fully liable for all resulting harm (Correct answer)
- Liability is limited to damage a normal person would have suffered
- The rule applies only to psychiatric injury claims
- A defendant is not liable for damage they could not have foreseen
Correct answer: A defendant must take their victim as they find them — if the plaintiff has a pre-existing vulnerability that causes unusually severe damage from the breach, the defendant is fully liable for all resulting harm
The eggshell skull rule (thin skull rule) provides that a defendant who is liable in negligence is responsible for all the consequences of their breach, even if those consequences are unusually severe because of a pre-existing condition. Foreseeability of the type of harm suffices.
FE-1 Tort Law 2
Under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1995 (Ireland), what duty is owed to a visitor?