Introduction
On February 8, 2013, the British Columbia Supreme Court dismissed an unusual lawsuit where a parent sued a school board for having failed to sufficiently discipline a student who assaulted and seriously injured their son. The unusual part is that the complaint for harsher discipline stemmed from an unrelated incident that occurred seven months previous to a different student. The injured boy’s parents claimed that harsher discipline for the previous incident to the different student would have prevented the assault on their son.
Facts
On October 5, 2006, grade 9 student Tylor Jackson asked his classmate Makwalla Hall if he could borrow a pencil from him.
After class that day Hall punched Tylor on the left side of his head, causing Tylor to fall and hit his head; sustaining a traumatic brain injury and leaving him mentally and physically compromised. Hall was then given an indefinite suspension.
Prior to this incident on March 2, 2006, Hall was involved in another incident with a different student whom he had shoved around a bit, but did not punch. The Vice Principal did not view the incident as serious and Hall received a ½ day in-school suspension.
The Lawsuit
In 2011, Jackson sued the jurisdiction alleging negligence on the basis that its care to Tylor fell below the standard of care of a prudent and careful parent.
Jackson argued that if Hall had been suspended in March 2006 for 3-5 days (instead of a ½ day in-school suspension), Hall would not have been emboldened by his misbehaviour.
Argument of the School Board
The jurisdiction asked the Court to dismiss the lawsuit as being without foundation.
Admitting it owed Jackson a duty of care, the school board said it did not breach the standard of care owed to Jackson and that Jackson failed to show a causal link between the March incident and the October incident.
Court Decision
The Court dismissed Jackson’s lawsuit.
The disciplinary measures imposed upon Hall in relation to the March incident were not inadequate or contrary to school policy. While a “punch” would typically result in a 3-to-5 day suspension, a shove did not.
There was nothing before the Court to reasonably conclude that the March incident was so serious to give rise to the kind of significant discipline suggested by Jackson and that this would have prevented Hall from punching Tylor. The two incidents occurred seven months apart, in separate school years, at a time when children’s behaviours were rapidly changing.
It made little sense that Tylor’s opinion of Hall when he asked him for a pencil in October would have been changed by his awareness of strong discipline imposed on Hall in March.
Lessons Learned from this Case
While school boards must take reasonable steps to remove foreseeable risk of harm and ensure students are not injured by other students, school boards are not responsible for all student injuries that occur at school.
Student discipline must be reasonable and proportionate to the student misbehaviour and serve an appropriate rehabilitative and deterrent effect.
We also take a moment to remind school boards that they may be responsible for an injury when:
• A student is injured at school because there was a
lack of reasonable supervision, or
• A teacher knows about bullying at the school but does
nothing to stop or prevent it.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
