Grimes v Hawkins & Anor

Grimes v Hawkins & Anor

The defendant was not in breach of duty under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 or at common law. The pool was not unsafe for diving, there were no hidden hazards, and the claimant, an adult, voluntarily undertook an activity with obvious risk. It would not be fair, just or reasonable to impose a duty requiring the defendant to prohibit diving or put the pool out of bounds.

Parties
Claimant: Kylie Grimes; First Defendant: David Hawkins; Second Defendant: Frimley Park Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil / Trial Judgment on Liability of First Defendant
Outcome
Claim against the first defendant dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Occupiers' Liability Act 1957, Duty of Care, Personal Injury, Swimming Pool Accidents
Tort Law Occupiers' Liability Negligence Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 Duty of Care Personal Injury Swimming Pool Accidents

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kylie Grimes

Claimant

David Hawkins

First Defendant

Frimley Park Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Trial Judgment on Liability of First Defendant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first defendant was in breach of duty under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 to the claimant
  2. 2 Whether the first defendant owed and breached a common law duty of care to the claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant was not in breach of duty under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 or at common law. The pool was not unsafe for diving, there were no hidden hazards, and the claimant, an adult, voluntarily undertook an activity with obvious risk. It would not be fair, just or reasonable to impose a duty requiring the defendant to prohibit diving or put the pool out of bounds.

Court Disposition

Claim against the first defendant dismissed