Titchener v British Railways Board [1983] 1 WLR 1427
Tort law – Trespassing – Duty of care
Facts
The appellant was struck by a train and was very seriously injured. This had taken place whilst the appellant was crossing a railway line between two suburban stations. This route had to be accessed by climbing an embankment and cutting through a gap in a fence. The fence had fallen into disrepair and had not been maintained by the respondent. The appellant brought an action under the Occupiers Liability (Scotland) Act 1960, claiming that the accident was caused by a failure to maintain the fence. The trial judge found for the respondents. The decision was subsequently appealed.
Issue
The court was required to weigh whether a duty was owed by the defendant to the claimant and importantly, whether they had discharged this duty by erecting a fence to prevent the public cutting across the railway line. In compiling their decision, the court would also have to decide as to whether the disrepair of the fence could fall under the defendant’s liability.
Held
The appeal was dismissed. The duty that would have been owed under the Occupiers Liability (Scotland) Act 1960 was meant for specific individuals entering the premises in question. The respondents discharged their duty of care by building a fence which was deemed to constitute a sufficient warning to keep people out of the property. There was no duty to maintain the fence in a reasonable state of repair. Moreover, it was deemed that if there had been, the appellant was deemed to have accepted the risks of crossing the train line.
Updated 20 March 2026
This case summary remains broadly accurate. Titchener v British Railways Board [1983] 1 WLR 1427 is a Scottish appeal decided under the Occupiers’ Liability (Scotland) Act 1960, and the legal principles described — concerning the limited duty owed to trespassers and the role of volenti non fit injuria — continue to represent the law as decided in that case. Readers should note that the 1960 Act applies in Scotland only; in England and Wales, the position on trespassers is governed by the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 (as amended). The article does not make this distinction explicit, which may be misleading for students studying English law. The Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 has not been substantively amended in ways that would alter the relevance of this case as a comparative authority, but English students should take care not to treat the Scottish statutory framework as directly applicable to English tort problems.
