A. A possessor of real property, including an owner, lessee, or other lawful occupant, owes no duty of care to a trespasser except in those circumstances where a common-law right of action, statutory right of action, or judicial exception existed as of July 1, 2013.
§ 8.01-219.1.Responsibility of possessor of real property for harm to trespasser.
Chapter 3. Actions · Article 21. Miscellaneous Provisions · Last amended 2013 · Last verified July 16, 2026
In one sentenceSection 8.01-219.1 codifies Virginia’s traditional common-law rule that a possessor of real property owes no duty of care to trespassers, preserving only the narrow common-law, statutory, and judicial exceptions that already existed as of July 1, 2013.
Full Text of § 8.01-219.1
B. This section does not affect any immunities from or defenses to liability established by another section of the Code or available at common law to which a possessor of real property may be entitled.
Plain-English Summary
Subsection A states the general rule plainly: an owner, lessee, or other lawful occupant of real property owes a trespasser no duty of care. That means a trespasser who is injured on someone else’s property generally cannot recover in negligence against the possessor, because the possessor owed no duty in the first place — the starting point for any negligence claim.
The rule is not absolute. Virginia common law has long recognized limited exceptions — for example, once a possessor discovers a trespasser’s presence, obligations can arise, and special rules have developed for child trespassers and other categories. Subsection A freezes those exceptions in place as of July 1, 2013: whatever common-law right of action, statutory right of action, or judicial exception existed on that date remains available, but the statute does not invite courts to expand trespasser protections beyond that baseline going forward.
Subsection B makes clear the statute is not exhaustive of every liability question. It leaves untouched any other immunity or defense available to a property possessor under another Code section or at common law — this section limits the duty owed to trespassers specifically; it does not narrow broader protections a possessor might otherwise have.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does a landowner owe any duty to someone trespassing on their property?
Generally no. Section 8.01-219.1 codifies the rule that possessors of real property owe trespassers no duty of care, subject to exceptions that already existed as of July 1, 2013.
What counts as an exception to the no-duty rule?
Any common-law right of action, statutory right of action, or judicial exception recognized as of July 1, 2013 — such as long-standing exceptions for discovered trespassers or child trespassers — continues to apply, since the statute preserves rather than creates such exceptions.
Can courts recognize new exceptions to the no-duty rule after 2013?
The statute ties available exceptions to the state of the law as of July 1, 2013, which limits room for a newly recognized exception to expand a possessor’s duty beyond what existed on that date.
Does this section eliminate other defenses a landowner might have?
No. Subsection B specifically preserves any other immunity or defense available under another statute or at common law; this section addresses only the duty owed to trespassers.
Who counts as a “possessor” under this section?
The statute lists an owner, a lessee, or any other lawful occupant of the real property — anyone lawfully in possession or control of the premises, not only a record titleholder.
Amendment History
2013, c. 217.
Source & verification. Section text and amendment history are
reproduced verbatim from the Code of Virginia, published by the
Code of Virginia, Virginia Division of Legislative Automated Systems. Last verified July 16, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: trespasser liability virginiaduty of care to trespassers virginiapremises liability trespasser virginia codevirginia landowner duty to trespasser