The Calcutta Law Journal Short Notes of Cases Articles and other Matters May 1st & 16th 1930

In a part of the field there was dangerous machinery of some attraction to children who to the knowledge of the defendants were in tl.e habit of making this part of the field a playground. [...] A child of the plaintiff’s had the mifortune to be killed whilst playing with the wheel and it was in respect of the death of the child that the action was brought. [...] If the facts and the judgment however in the above cases are carefully examined it would appear that there is no inconsistency since while in the former case of Robert Addle and Sons (Coilieties Limited) v. Dumbreck (2) the House held that the child was a trespasser at the time in the latter the House held that the child was to be regarded not as a trepasser but as a licensee. [...] The fence was broken down with the result that children were enabled to get into the land and to the knoledge of the operator of the wire rope children did in fact trespass on the land while the rope was being worked. [...] It is to be noted that while in the former the operator was in a position of seeing whether anyone approached the machinery but neglected to do so in the latter the operator was not in this postion since the wheel which caused the accident was hidden from his view by the brow of a hill.