The result of the Third Report of the Law Reform Committee, the act was introduced to Parliament as the Occupiers' Liability Bill and granted royal assent on 6 June 1957, coming into force on 1 January 1958.

[1] The Third Report of the Law Reform Committee recommended changing this system,[2] and the Occupiers' Liability Bill was given its second reading on 6 March 1957 by Sir Harry Hylton-Foster, the Solicitor-General,[3] and royal assent on 6 June 1957.

[6] Section 1(3) extends the standards set by the Act not only to land but to any fixed or movable structure, which includes ships and aircraft.

This is another extension of a common law principle; in Glasgow Corporation v Taylor [1922] 1 AC 44, a seven-year-old child died after eating poisonous berries from a bush in a park.

Section 2(3)(b) of the Act provides that such a person "will appreciate and guard against any special risks ordinarily incidental to [his calling], so far as the occupier leaves him free to do so".

In Rae v Mars (UK) Ltd [1990] it was held that where danger is extreme or unusual, it not enough for there to be a warning; a barrier or additional notice should be placed.

Haseldine v CA Daw & Son Ltd [1941] established that the more technical a job is, the more reasonable it is to entrust it to an independent contractor, while in Woodward v The Mayor of Hastings [1945] the court held that an occupier is not always absolved from liability if they have entrusted the job to a competent person; an occupier is required to take the kind of care that a reasonable man in his place would take.

In Bottomley v Todmorden Cricket Club [2003] the Court of Appeal held that, where the defendant had allowed an independent contractor to set up a pyrotechnic display on their land without checking for public liability insurance, they were liable for the injuries suffered by the claimant.

The Court of Appeal also held that, except in special circumstances, there was no "free-standing duty" to take reasonable steps to ensure an independent contractor was insured.

[20] Section 2(5) of the Act provides that there is no liability for "risks willingly accepted as his by the visitor", an application of volenti non fit injuria.

[25] Section 5 extends the common duty of care to those people entering, using, bringing or sending goods to the property under the terms of a contract.