Case Analysis: Wheat v E Lacon & Co Ltd [1966]

(a) Facts of case

Mr. Wheat, the husband of the appellant fell while going down the back stairs of a public
house called The Golfers Arms at Great Yarmouth. He was found lying on the floor of the
vestibule at the bottom of the stairs and there was no bulb in the light. Unexpectedly, he died.
Mrs. Wheat his widow commenced an action against E. Lacon & Co. Ltd., the respondent to
this appeal, and the owners of the public house, Mr. Richardson and his wife, the manager of
it. She claimed damages of her husbands death by reason of the negligence and breach of
duty of the defendants.

(b) Issue
Both the Richardsons and Lacon were occupiers for the purposes of the Occupiers Liability
Act 1957. Because both of them may owned the common duty of case. It was possible occur
more than one occupier. The owner of the public house (E. Lacon & Co. Ltd) had the duty to
occupier of the staircase. He needs to be liable, because he must go and check the electrical
equipment two times per month to avoid occur the negligence. He was also needs had
retained the right to repair which gave them a sufficient degree of control. However, the
plaintiff was found that Lacon was not in breach of duty since the provision of light bulbs
would have been part of the day to day management duties of the Richardsons. Since the
Richardsons were not party to the appeal the claimants action failed.
The E. Lacon & Co. Ltd must had duty of care to all the person coming lawfully on the
premises and to reasonable safety including the handrail and the system of the lighting was
efficient and automatic switch on when surrounding become dark.

(c)Judgment
The public house found that E. Lacon & Co. Ltd and the manager are occupier, however both
of them were not in breach of their duty as occupiers. Because it would be no reasonable to
impose a duty upon the occupiers to confirm light bulbs are function. The main legal issue in
the act as occupiers. He defined the "occupier" as a person who has sufficient control over the
premises to the extent that he ought to realise that lack of care on his part can cause damage
to his lawful visitors.
1. The judge held that Mr. Wheat was not guilty of contributory negligence.
2. The agreement was for the occupation of the whole of the public house by their
servant, Mr. Richardson. It was not contended on their behalf that they had divested
themselves of occupation and control of the ground floor of the premises.
3. If the defendant fail to exercise the due care will cases injured to the visitors.
4. Where the owner did not let by demise, but merely licensed the property (i.e. allowed
another person to live on it).
5. He will be considered occupier of the entire space because he would retain the right
and the duty to do repairs.
In both cases he will be occupier jointly with the tenant. A contractor doing work on the
premises can also be classed as occupier in certain circumstances, whether or not jointly with
the owner.
In this particular case, they all had different duties of care towards the visitors, depending on
how much control they exercised. In this case, the owners were responsible for keeping the
handrail safe and the lighting system maintained. However, the handrail could not reasonably
be considered dangerous provided there was light and the lack of light was caused by an
unknown stranger taking out the light bulb. Consequently, the respondents did not fail in their
duty as occupiers towards their visitors and were not liable.

(d)Lesson learnt

In this case (Wheat v E Lacon & Co Ltd [1966]). It can be learnt that we must be a person
that were responsibility because we need to have the duty of care to our neighbour, client,
tenant and we cannot be the person like Lacon.
It deemed that at some stage of his descent Mr. Wheat had decided to turn back, perhaps
realizing that the staircase did not lead to the bars, perhaps because the down of the staircase
was in darkness and that in the course of tuning to his right on the narrow treads, he lost the
balance by himself and he fall down. So it will make he injured.