Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Risk and Responsibility: Liability of School Authorities for Harm to Pupils

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of Education Law for Schools

  • 2092 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter considers the responsibility of school authorities for the physical, mental and emotional harm suffered by their pupils. It examines the potential for school liability for physical injury within the duty of care owed in the tort of negligence and the approach of the courts to what may reasonably be expected of educators particularly in light of civil liability legislation. It then considers the parameters of school liability for psychiatric harm caused by the intentional acts of others, such as bullying, cyberbullying and sexual abuse. It touches on developing initiatives towards practising citizenship and restorative practice aimed at reducing many of the threats to young people by school cultures characterised by respect and responsibility.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Anders, J. (2015). Keeping kids in school and out of court: A study of education – Youth justice collaboration in the US, Scotland and Denmark. Canberra: Winston Churchill Memorial Trust of Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australia Capital Territory Schools Authority v El Sheik (2000) FCA 931 (11 July 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazley v Curry. (1999). 2 SCR 534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belsey, B. (2007). Always on, always aware! bullying.org. 17 January www.cyberbullying.ca

  • Buckley, S., & Maxwell, G. (2007). Respectful schools: Restorative practices in education a summary report. Office of the Children’s Commissioner and the Institute of Policy Studies, School of Government, Victoria University, Wellington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bujnowicz v Trustees Roman Catholic Church [2005] NSWCA 457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catholic Education Office Archdiocese of Melbourne, Student Wellbeing Central to Learning and School Improvement. (2007, October). http://web.spgww.catholic.edu.au/documents/policies/restorativejusticeresearch.pdf

  • Commonwealth v Introvigne. (1982). 150 CLR 258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox v New South Wales [2007] NSWCA 471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deatons Pty Ltd v Flew (1949) 79 CLR 370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer, A., & Easteal, P. (2013). Cyber bullying in Australian schools: The question of negligence and liability. Alternative Law Journal, 38(2), 92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fallas v Mourlas [2006] NSWCA 32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fronius, et al. (2016). Restorative justice in US schools: A research review. San Francisco: Wested Justice and Prevention Research Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory v New South Wales [2009] NSWSC 559.

    Google Scholar 

  • H v Pennell and South Australia. (1987). 46 SASR 158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayden, A. (2001). Restorative conferencing manual of Aotearoa New Zealand. Wellington: Department for Courts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill v Van Erp. (1997). 188 CLR 159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ipp, J. (2002). Report of the panel for the review of the law of negligence (the Ipp report). http:revofneg.treasury.gov.au/content/reports.asp

  • Kretschmar v Queensland. (1989). Aust Torts Reports ¶80–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lisa Eskinazi v Victoria (County Court (Vic), Lewitan J, No 06471/99, 20 June 2003, unreported).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazerolle, P., Legosz, M., & Finighan, P. Weapons in schools in Queensland: The nature, causes and responses (2011) Griffith University, Brisbane. www.behaviour.education.qld.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/.../weapons-in-schools.pdf

  • Miller v South Australia. (1980). 24 SASR 416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, B., & Vaandering, D. (2012). Restorative justice: Pedagogy, praxis, and discipline. Journal of School Violence, 11(2), 138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • New South Wales v Lepore. (2003). 195 ALR 412; Samin v Queensland and Rich v Queensland (2003) 195 ALR 412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osher, D., Bear, G., Sprague, J., & Doyle, W. (2010). How can we improve school discipline? Educational Researcher, 39(1), 48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oyston v St Patrick’s College (No 2) [2013] NSWCA 310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelletier, R., Handal, B., Khalil, J., & Francis, T. (2015). Cyberbullying – When does a school authority’s liability in Tort end? The Western Australian Jurist, 6, 93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry-Hazan, L., & Birnhack, M. (2016). The hidden human rights curriculum of surveillance cameras in schools: Due process, privacy and trust. Cambridge Journal of Education, 48(1), 47–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prince Alfred College Incorporated v ADC [2016] HCA 37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roads and Traffic Authority of New South Wales v Dederer. (2007). 234 CLR 330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rooney, T. (2010). Trusting children: How do surveillance technologies alter a child’s experience of trust, risk and responsibility? Surveillance & Society, 7(3/4), 344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salmond, J. (1907). Salmond on Torts (1st ed.). London: Sweet & Maxwell. Schools should be sued for cyberbullying: Experts. Sydney Morning Herald, August 15 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shariff, S., & Hoff, D. L. (2007). Cyberbullying: Clarifying the legal boundaries for school supervision in cyberspace. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 1(1), 76.

    Google Scholar 

  • St Mark’s Orthodox Coptic College v Abraham [2007] NSWCA 185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, A., Johnson, B., Owens, L., & Conway, R. (2014). Punish them or engage them? Teachers’ views of unproductive student behaviours in the classroom. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(6), 43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Canberra and Goulburn v Hadba [2005] HCA 31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uniting Church in Australia Property Trust (NSW) v Miller, Miller v Lithgow City Council [2015] NSWCA 320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varnham, S. (2015, November). The role of Catholic schools in Australia in educating for human rights and social justice: An overview. Paper presented at the annual conference of the European education law association, within educating for today and tomorrow: A renewing passion, The World Catholic Education Congress, The Vatican, 18–21. (International Journal of Education Law and Policy Special Issue forthcoming).

    Google Scholar 

  • Varnham, S., Evers, M., & Booth, T. (2014–2015a). Valuing their voices: Encouraging responsibility and citizenship through student participation in school decision making. International Journal of Law and Education, 19(2) & 20(1), 23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varnham, S., Evers, M., Booth, T., & Avgoustinos, C. (2014–2015b). Democracy in schools: Encouraging responsibility and citizenship through student participation in school decision making. International Journal of Law and Education, 19(1) & 20(1), 73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson v Haines. (1987). Aust Torts reports 80–094.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyong Shire Council v Shirt (1980) 146 CLR 40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyong Shire Council v Vairy [2004] NSWCA 247.

    Google Scholar 

  • X (minors) v Bedfordshire County Council; M (a minor) and another v Newham London Borough Council and others; E (a minor) v Dorset County Council; and other appeals [1995] 2 AC 633.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zehr, H. (1990). Changing Lenses: A New Focus for Crime and Justice. Herald Press: North Dakota.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, NSW, Australia

    Sally Varnham

Authors
  1. Sally Varnham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sally Varnham .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Business, Law, Education & Arts, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD, Australia

    Karen Trimmer

  2. School of Education, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, Australia

    Roselyn Dixon

  3. Faculty of Business, Law, Education & Arts, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD, Australia

    Yvonne S. Findlay

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Varnham, S. (2018). Risk and Responsibility: Liability of School Authorities for Harm to Pupils. In: Trimmer, K., Dixon, R., S. Findlay, Y. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Education Law for Schools. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77751-1_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77751-1_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-77750-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-77751-1

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation