Remedies for Negligence in a School Injury
A 14-year-old student is injured during a school-organised obstacle course. The school had inspected the course that morning but failed to notice a loose rope anchor. A teacher was supervising but was distracted by another student. The student suffers a broken wrist and later develops anxiety about sport. The school admits the course was unsafe but argues the student voluntarily participated and signed a consent form. The form stated 'I accept all risks'. The student's family seeks damages for medical costs, lost future earnings (the student hoped to become a professional athlete), and pain and suffering.
1. Assess the school's liability in negligence and evaluate the effect of the consent form.
Read the worked answer
Duty: A school owes a duty of care to students, including for supervised activities.
Breach: The standard is that of a reasonable school. Failing to detect a loose anchor after an inspection, and inadequate supervision, likely breaches that standard. The school's admission that the course was unsafe supports breach.
Causation: The injury must be caused by the breach. If the loose anchor caused the fall, causation is established. The anxiety requires proof of a recognised psychiatric injury and causation.
Consent form: A signed form does not automatically exclude liability. In Australia, a person cannot consent to negligent conduct causing injury merely by signing a general waiver; consent requires informed, voluntary acceptance of a specific risk. The form's broad wording ('all risks') is unlikely to be effective against negligence, and a minor's capacity to give such consent is limited. Statutory provisions may also restrict exclusion clauses.
Conclusion: The school is likely liable. The form is weak evidence of voluntary assumption of risk but does not defeat the claim.
2. Evaluate the likelihood of success for each head of damage claimed.
Read the worked answer
Medical costs: Strong. These are direct, quantifiable losses caused by the injury. Likely recoverable in full.
Pain and suffering: Strong. General damages for non-economic loss are available, subject to statutory thresholds and caps. The broken wrist and documented anxiety support this head, though the anxiety claim requires medical evidence of a recognised psychiatric condition.
Lost future earnings as a professional athlete: Weak. This is speculative. The student must prove, on the balance of probabilities, that but for the injury they would have become a professional athlete. That requires evidence of realistic prospects - selection history, performance data, and expert assessment. Courts discount such claims heavily for contingencies (injury, competition, career length).
Overall: Liability is likely, but damages will be modest relative to the family's expectations. The athlete claim is the weakest and may be reduced substantially or rejected. Advice: focus on medical costs, pain and suffering, and any actual loss of earning capacity rather than a speculative career.