McPherson (AP) v Perth & Kinross Council [2001] ScotCS 20 (26 January 2001)

McPherson (AP) v Perth & Kinross Council [2001] ScotCS 20 (26 January 2001)

The pursuer's case is relevant to the extent it alleges failure to apply the school's own buddy system to a vulnerable child and failure to investigate and discipline after prior incidents, but is irrelevant regarding increased playground supervision and briefing supervisors, as no criticism is made of the absence of supervisors. The case against the class teacher cannot be dismissed on relevancy alone, as the timing and content of communications to the head teacher may be material. A proof before answer is required on the remaining issues.

Citation
[2001] ScotCS 20
Parties
Pursuer: Helen Davina McPherson (AP); Defenders: Perth & Kinross Council
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
26 January 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil (reparation/personal Injury) / Procedure Roll Debate on Relevancy; Interlocutory Decision
Outcome
Partial exclusion of averments; proof before answer allowed on remaining issues
Legal Topics
Duty of Care in Schools, Bullying, Vicarious Liability, Playground Supervision, Standard of Care for Teachers
Delict Education Law Personal Injury Duty of Care in Schools Bullying Vicarious Liability Playground Supervision Standard of Care for Teachers

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Helen Davina McPherson (AP)

Pursuer

Perth & Kinross Council

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Civil (reparation/personal Injury) / Procedure Roll Debate on Relevancy; Interlocutory Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defenders owed and breached a duty of care to protect the pursuer's child from bullying and injury at school
  2. 2 Whether the school was negligent in failing to implement or apply its 'buddy' system to the pursuer's child
  3. 3 Whether the class teacher was negligent in failing to communicate incidents to the head teacher

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's case is relevant to the extent it alleges failure to apply the school's own buddy system to a vulnerable child and failure to investigate and discipline after prior incidents, but is irrelevant regarding increased playground supervision and briefing supervisors, as no criticism is made of the absence of supervisors. The case against the class teacher cannot be dismissed on relevancy alone, as the timing and content of communications to the head teacher may be material. A proof before answer is required on the remaining issues.

Court Disposition

Partial exclusion of averments; proof before answer allowed on remaining issues

Orders

  • Averments regarding increased playground supervision and briefing supervisors excluded from record
  • Proof before answer allowed on remaining branches of the pursuer's case