A nine year old pupil was injured by a fellow pupil whirling an anorak around his head. The accident occurred when they were on their way from the school buildings to the school gates at the end of school day. There was no member of staff on duty to supervise the passage of pupils on their way home. The claim against the school succeeded before the trial judge.
Held: The defendant’s appeal was allowed. A primary school was not negligent in not employing someone to supervise the playground after the close of school hours and until all the children had left. The teachers’ evidence that no playground supervision was provided before school hours at any secondary schools where they had taught was the best evidence of the requirements of reasonableness. Mantell LJ: ‘the very short period in which pupils moved from the exit from the school building to the gate at the other end of the playground is quite different, even allowing for the fact that, as the headmaster accepted and Mr Turton emphasised, departing pupils are likely to be high spirited at that particular moment of the day. Moreover, and to my mind most importantly, there was no evidence that supervision at that juncture, as contrasted with the lunch break, is standard procedure, as it surely would be if it was an equally reasonable requirement. I therefore would also allow the appeal.’
Judges:
Hirst LJ, Mantell LJ
Citations:
Times 28-Nov-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 2644, [1998] PIQR P145
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Kearn-Price v Kent County Council CA 30-Oct-2002
The claimant was injured, being hit in the face by a football in a school playground. It was before school started. There had been accidents, and there were rules which had not been enforced. The school appealed a finding of negligence.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Education, Professional Negligence
Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.143043