Of course homeowners are responsible for ensuring their home is safe for visitors. (Even burglars have successfully sued householders after becoming injured during a break-in for goodness sake!) Imagine that this ambulance chap had responded to the 999 call, and while he was an the couple's house a dangerously unsafe wall had collapsed and fallen on him - a wall which the couple knew was unsafe but had not bothered to fix - causing serious injuries (time off work, big medical bills, perhaps permanent injuries...). I don't think there would be much debate in such a case: the couple's negligence led to the injury to the unsuspecting ambulance chap. Admittedly the flickering light / falling over case is much more of a grey area. Did the couple know the light was flickering? Did they know it was a danger? Was the flickering light totally responsible for the fall? What injuries did the guy sustain? Without details we really cannot say categorically whether it was "right" of him to sue, or whether he should win his case. Knowing the press, many facts will have been left out, and others embellished, so it's entirely possible that this guy is not being unreasonable. Re you gasman scenario, Tom, I'd have thought it comes down to the nature of the light fault. If there was a persistent fault with the light over the stairs, and you failed to fix it or to warn your visitor of the problem, then you've not taken adequate care to ensure his safety. If the bulb just went, as bulbs occasionally do, without warning, then that is as much of a surprise to you as it is to the gasman, and the gasman would know that there is a small risk the bulb could blow, so that's not something you would be expected to take responsibility for. Having said that, if it was a busy stairway (probably not in a private house) then I suppose it could be argued that there ought to be a backup system to light the stairs in case of a bulb blowing, or power cut, etc.