Brighton and Hove Council to be sued?

[Barrel of Fun]

Do you think the parents are in the right?

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/loca...family_to_sue_school_after_death_of_child.php

 

[Publius Ovidius]

very very difficult one...my wife works with special needs kiddies and you cannot supervise kids every second of the day.

Can you sue a school for consequential damages?

 

[The Clown of Pevensey Bay]

It's been ten years since I did A-Level law, but I think it depends if the poor girl's death was a "reasonably forseeable" consequence of the negligence.

 

[Seagullible]

I would say no, it's a very tough one and horrible when a child has ultimately lost her life, but to say it was the schools fault she got a chest infection is a bit far stretched. To put it another way, if a child went on a school trip to the Natural History museum and cought an ilness from someone else visiting that day, is it the schools fault?

 

[Brovion]

It's been ten years since I did A-Level law, but I think it depends if the poor girl's death was a "reasonably forseeable" consequence of the negligence.

You'd think so - but I think all that 'reasonable' element went out of English Law (not a lawyer so I could be wrong).

Unfortunately suing schools is what people do now - and the schools have to take ridiculous steps to protect themselves. A bit off-topic but when my son was in Year 6 at Balfour there was a French school trip and they asked for parents to volunteer as helpers. I did and they asked us to come into school for a meeting so they could go through the procedure. Fair enough.

What they did though was give us these MASSIVE handouts in which every single eventuality had been covered and telling us what we had to do to prevent accidents. I'll give you some examples:

Activity: Eating food on the coach
Potential Hazard: Choking
Possible outcome: Death
Action: Don't let the children eat on the coach

Activity: Children walking/running on the deck of the ferry.
Potential Hazard: Falling overboard
Possible outcome: Death
Action: Don't let the children on the deck.

It was all like this for page after page. God knows how much it cost to produce (no wonder there's no money for education!) and of course it was done for 'Insurance' and 'Health and Safety' reasons - i.e. so if someone did sue the school they could say they'd followed all the procedures.

There wasn't a French trip next year.

 

[Publius Ovidius]

My mate's son goes to a school in Gloucester and they have now stopped all contact sports...Rugby, football, cricket, hockey, basketball, and bizzarly badminton because one parent sued the school when her little darling was selected for the school rugby team and he , naturally, got a shoulder in the face giving him a black eye and concussion.

The same parent tried to stop school sports day as it was cruel on those childern who didnt win anything..and also formed a group to complain that throwing the javelin was dangerous and should not be allowed ( suffice it to say athletics is now just running)

 

[Woodchip]

No. This whole suing over someone's death is utterly pointless. No amount of money will ever bring back a loved one.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Being in the business of providing services to disabled people, including children with multiple disabilities, I've just checked our insurance and, indeed, the City Council's requirements for us to be insured when we provide services on their behalf.

Because that's what claims like this basically come down to.

The parents won't be insured. But they expect (and sometimes have the right to) compensation in the event of death or injury arising from someone else's actions. The usual way to kickstart the process is for the parents to make a claim through the legal system.

That seems to be what's happening here.

I can't see any particular reason for them ticking the box for "Maximum Publicity in The Argus, Please". Indeed, this may not help the claim.

The issue is the extent to which a liability has arisen. And how much compensation, if any, is due.

In brutal monetary terms, the loss of a severely disabled child is rarely valued highly by the insurance industry. And is usually valued higher by families. Maybe this is all about just that?

It will be interesting to see whether any changes in the practice of providing care and education for disabled children will arise from this case.

 

[silky1]

( suffice it to say athletics is now just running)

That's a bit reckless, think of the possible heartattack potential, the damage that running spikes could cause!
And making sure everybody finished the race at the exactly the same time would be a logistical nightmare.

 

[Scarface]

Why don't they sue the hospital? That's where she picked up the chest infections.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

I always find it strange that people want financial compensation. More often than not, they criticise the hopistal/school etc. for not funding extra people and so on. But, then they want to have them financially penalised? That is hardly going to help the organisation. Particularly as the victims tend to say "I don't want this to happen to someone else."

Perhaps I am being cynical and unfair.

 

[Grendel]

"We are suing so this can't happen to someone else."

Like hell they are. They've seen the chance for a few quid and their eyes lit up.

 

[Goodfella]

"Her family believes there was only one teacher present with the six pupils at the time, although five members of staff were allocated to the class.
They say they have been told four of the workers took their break at the same time".

This is the reason they may just win this case.

 

[Grendel]

"Her family believes there was only one teacher present with the six pupils at the time, although five members of staff were allocated to the class.
They say they have been told four of the workers took their break at the same time".

This is the reason they may just win this case.

I thought one had to PROVE things in court in order to win a case, rather than just turn up and say that the cleaners daughters cat told you so?

 

[TSB]

No chance.

 

[Goodfella]

I thought one had to PROVE things in court in order to win a case, rather than just turn up and say that the cleaners daughters cat told you so?

Indeed it does, but does sound as though the information came from somebody within the school, and if that person/persons agree to be a witness, who knows?

 

[e77]

I think there should be a full enquiry 'so it won't happen again' but money won't bring her back.

 

[fork me]

You'd think so - but I think all that 'reasonable' element went out of English Law (not a lawyer so I could be wrong).

Unfortunately suing schools is what people do now - and the schools have to take ridiculous steps to protect themselves. A bit off-topic but when my son was in Year 6 at Balfour there was a French school trip and they asked for parents to volunteer as helpers. I did and they asked us to come into school for a meeting so they could go through the procedure. Fair enough.

What they did though was give us these MASSIVE handouts in which every single eventuality had been covered and telling us what we had to do to prevent accidents. I'll give you some examples:

Activity: Eating food on the coach
Potential Hazard: Choking
Possible outcome: Death
Action: Don't let the children eat on the coach

Activity: Children walking/running on the deck of the ferry.
Potential Hazard: Falling overboard
Possible outcome: Death
Action: Don't let the children on the deck.

It was all like this for page after page. God knows how much it cost to produce (no wonder there's no money for education!) and of course it was done for 'Insurance' and 'Health and Safety' reasons - i.e. so if someone did sue the school they could say they'd followed all the procedures.

There wasn't a French trip next year.

Oh yes, I have to fill in those risk assessments for every school trip we do. A quote:

Possible hazard: Coach driver arrives drunk
Action to avoid: Use a reputable coach company.

I kid you not.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

What about this? -

Activity: Children getting something out of the education process.
Potential Hazard: Risk assessment procedure intervenes to prevent this.
Possible outcome: Country goes to the dogs.
Action: Abandon risk assessment procedure.

 

[adrian29uk]

My girlfriend is a teacher and like one other poster said it is very very difficult to look after 30+ kids.

Its even worse if you teach in Luton, where some of the kids go balastic and will smash a room to pieces and go as far as threatening to kill the teacher.

I used to take the piss out of schools for closing when it snowed, but this is the exact reason like above, why they don't open. If a kid slips over they are likely to sue the council.