| SPOTLIGHT |
The Supreme Court will this week rule on the criteria to be applied in determining the circumstances in which a school’s duty to its pupils under the National Curriculum can be delegated.
The appellant in the case of Woodland v Essex County Council is a ten-year-old pupil at a junior school in Essex, where the county council (the respondent) is the local education authority.
Essex CC was required under the National Curriculum to provide swimming lessons for pupils. Regular lessons were held at a pool owned by Basildon Council.
The lessons were provided through a contract with Beryl Stotford, trading as ‘Direct Swimming Services’.
On 5 July 2000, the appellant was involved in a near drowning incident. She suffered serious brain damage and is now incapable of looking after her own affairs.
It is alleged that Direct Swimming Services, through its employees, was negligent in the conduct of the lesson and that dilatoriness and laxity of supervision caused her injury. Her case is supported by expert evidence.
Ms Stotford’s insurers do not accept that they are liable to indemnify under the policy on the ground that the county council owed a non-delegable duty not merely to take care of them but to ensure that reasonable care is taken of them by private actors engaged by them to fulfill their duties under the National Curriculum.
Essex CC sought to strike out the pleadings in so far as they claimed there to be a ‘non-delegable’ duty.
The High Court granted the local authority’s application on the basis that there was no real prospect of success on that point.
The Court of Appeal upheld that decision by a majority, although it was agreed that there might be circumstances where such a non-delegable duty could be owed by a local authority.
Laws LJ issued a dissenting judgment that would have held the duty to be non-delegable on the facts.
The Supreme Court is due to hand down its judgment on Wednesday (23 October).
