Phipps v Rochester [1955] 1 QB 450

Queen’s Bench Division

Facts: A five-year-old child fell into an unguarded trench on a building site while playing, resulting in a broken leg. The site was often used by children, but no steps had been taken to prevent their access.

Issue: What steps are required by a landowner to discharge their duty of care towards child trespassers?

Held: the developer was not under a duty to take steps to reduce the danger. The responsibility rested primarily on the parents.

• Devlin J (Dismissing the claim):
  The landowner does not implicitly license trespassers by failing to stop them continually. While some precautions for older children may be necessary, small children, lacking understanding, cannot reasonably be expected to be safeguarded by the landowner in all cases. Responsibility for young children generally rests with their parents.