arising from that hazard (in other words, the distinction between knowledge and acceptance of risk introduced in Smith v Baker (1891) in favour of the employee was not extended to the visiting worker). After Horton visiting workers would often argue that they had temporarily (that is, pro hac vice) become the employees of the occupier of the premises until statute abolished the distinctions between the various categories of visitor: OCCUPIERS’ LIABILITY ACT 1957

doi:10.4324/9781843140504-65

Chapter

arising from that hazard (in other words, the distinction between knowledge and acceptance of risk introduced in Smith v Baker (1891) in favour of the employee was not extended to the visiting worker). After Horton visiting workers would often argue that they had temporarily (that is, pro hac vice) become the employees of the occupier of the premises until statute abolished the distinctions between the various categories of visitor: OCCUPIERS’ LIABILITY ACT 1957

Chapter

ABSTRACT

The simplification of the legal content of the occupiers’ duty, by the abolition of categories of visitor, paved the way for the breakdown of the category system more generally. The matter was addressed by the Court of Appeal in the following case, an appeal by the defendants from a judgment delivered in a circuit court by Parker CJ.