Trespasser is Explained in Addie Case

Trespasser is explained in Addie case

By

Shahzadi

Image by Steve Nimmons via Flickr

The term “trespasser” is a comprehensive word, it covers the wicked and the innocent, the burglar, the arrogant invader of another’s land, the walker blithely unaware that he is stepping where he has no right to walk, or the wandering child, all may be dubbed as trespassers. The House of Lords in Addie’s case held that no duty at all arose until the trespassers were known to be on the land. It is easy to extend that to a case when the occupier as good as knows, where he shuts his eyes: he will not then ‘ be heard to say that he did not know. But he has no duty to do anything before the trespasser arrives. If, on the other hand, a duty were to arise before the trespasser’s arrival, when that arrival is merely foreseeable or probable, the situation would be very different. The occupier would have to do what that duty required him to do to prepare for the trespasser’s arrival. But that is precisely what Addie’s case says he need not do. A duty to act with humanity towards a trespasser known to be there is one thing. It would completely transform the whole picture and completely supersede the Addie duty in all cases where the arrival of the injured trespasser had been probable or foreseeable.