• An occupier owes a trespasser no common duty of care.
• A trespasser injured in a persons premises has no actionable claim against the occupier.
• This question appear to be founded on the assumption that a trespasser has the same remedies as a visitor. The occupier may rely on the following defenses:
o Consented to the risk i.e. (volenti non fit injuria).
o The occupier had given adequate warning of the danger.
o Liability was excluded by the contract between the parties.
o The injury is a consequence of the faulty execution of a task by a competent independent contract and the occupier has satisfied himself that the contractor had discharged the same reasonably.