When Nature Strikes: Who Is Liable?

Why the Other Options Are Incorrect

Option A is incorrect because although a claim may be brought under occupiers’ liability principles, occupiers are not automatically liable for injuries caused by wild animals found on their land. The claimant must establish a breach of duty.

Option C is incorrect because occupiers’ liability is not excluded merely because the injury was caused by a wild animal. The issue is whether the injury arose from a danger due to the state of the premises or things done or omitted to be done on them.

Option D is incorrect because the occupier’s duty extends only to risks that it knew or ought reasonably to have known about. The fact that wildlife may exist somewhere within a national park does not, without more, make a bite from a rare snake species a foreseeable danger requiring a warning. The absence of previous sightings is strong evidence that the Park Authority neither knew nor ought reasonably to have known of the specific risk.

Option E is incorrect because injuries caused by wild animals are not automatically excluded from occupiers’ liability claims. In some circumstances, liability may arise if the occupier knew or ought to have known of the danger and failed to take reasonable steps to address it.