Thanks Ger. In terms of legal principle, an important illustration of the
new (for the UK) non-delegable duty owed by schools and ³education
authorities². Essex County Council, the 3rd defendant, will have to bear
all the damages- the judgment reveals that the lady, Ms Stopford, who ran
the swimming teaching firm who employed both the swimming teacher (Ms
Burlington) and the lifeguard (Ms Maxwell), was denied coverage by her
insurance company (see para [8]). This sounds odd but I suppose there may
have been some limitation in the insurance policy.
There seems to have been no ³direct² negligence by Essex. So the recovery
of damages is purely grounded on the fact that Essex, as education
provider, owed a non-delegable duty to the pupils which imposed liability
on them for the carelessness of contractors, such as the swimming teaching
firm of Ms Stopford, in discharging the authority¹s duty to see that
reasonable care was taken for the safety of the students.
I have no qualms about the decision, it follows the law as articulated by
the UKSC. It provides a good illustration of how NDD works.
Regards
Neil

NEIL FOSTER
Associate Professor
Newcastle Law School
Faculty of Business and Law
MC177 McMullin Building

T: +61 2 49217430
E: neil.foster@newcastle.edu.au
<mailto:Firstname.Lastname@newcastle.edu.au>

Further details: http://www.newcastle.edu.au/profile/neil-foster
My publications: http://works.bepress.com/neil_foster/ ,
http://ssrn.com/author=504828


The University of Newcastle (UoN)
University Drive
Callaghan NSW 2308
Australia

CRICOS Provider 00109J


<http://www.newcastle.edu.au/>






On 15/02/2015 2:38 am, "Gerard Sadlier" <gerard.sadlier@gmail.com> wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>A couple of people have asked me for the link to this judgment, which
>I mentioned on the list yesterday. Please see below, with my apologies
>for omitting it yesterday and for 2 emails where 1 would have been
>sufficient.
>
>http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2015/273.html
>
>Kind regards
>
>Ger