d

Procedural History

A group of english girls (age 15 to 17) set off for an expedition in belize, along with a teacher, Miss Pina, and two former soldiers, Forbes and Cole, members of ALS a specialist company who assisted in the organization. During they stay in a farm where the girls where working, two of them were raped by a local man, Aaron, joint owner of the aforementioned farm.

Issue

The legal issue is whether the School and ALS have a vicarious liability for Aaron behaviour? In which case, is the School liable for breach in their duty of care in the organization of this expedition?

Facts

1. Though Aaron never was an employee of either defendant is argued that he was recruited as part of the leadership team and entrusted with the supervision of the girls.
2. A veto of Forbes and Cole regarding a working in the jungle proposed by Aaron, considered too dangerous, is a good indicator of were true control lay.
3. The School followed a good practice guide by the Department of Education regarding staffing ratios for visit abroad (HASPEV), and both Miss Pina and ALS member where highly experienced.

Rule of Law

1. Although vicarious liability can apply to relationships other than that of employment, it is a principle which is not infinitely extendable.

1. According to Lord Reid, an affirmative duty to prevent deliberate wrongdoing by a third party arise where the action is not merely foreseeable but that it had to be the very thing likely to happen

Reasoning

1. Considering the relationship between the defendant and Aaron, it would be fair to consider the former vicariously liable for Aaron’s action.

1. The strict following of HASPEV good practice by the School proves it didn’t breach its duty of care.

1. Other than instituting some sort of watch-keeping by the three supervisors, there would have been no way of defeating Aaron assault. It would not be reasonable to define the scope of their duty as to require them to have taken those precaution.

Holding

The Court hold that the defendants did not breach their respective duties of care to the claimants.

share on: facebook