Motor
Click here to see a bigger version of this map

Claims investigation service based in Cork. Our site sets out to provide useful claims information to others in the business and beyond. Thank you for your visit. Feedback is always welcome. Site updated 14th April 2008

Get Adobe Reader

Get Quick Access to our library of useful info.          Click Here.

All content © John Higgins 2002-2006 Cork, Ireland

Supervision in Schools

Much has been written about the issue of supervision in schools A school has a duty to exercise the care that a parent would in the circumstances. The duty to supervise arises from this primary duty. The school must provide adequate supervision in all the circumstances.

The degree of supervision required will depend on factors such as the numbers and ages of the pupils and the nature of the activities taking place at the time. It is accepted for example that there should be supervision in the major areas where students congregate, younger children need more supervision as do hazardous activities.

On the other hand it has been held in cases such as Byrne V St Laurence's National School that "one must not go to the other extreme of bringing up children 'cocooned in cotton wool'". So said Justice Lynch in dismissing that High Court action. Judge Frank Martin in the Circuit Court dealing with a 1983 accident involving Gaelscoil Insechoir said that "Teachers are under no obligation to constantly shepherd pupils at school". He said that "Constant supervision is not necessary" and that the duty of the teachers "is one of reasonable care, the same as a parent would apply". In O'Gorman v Crotty (1946) a ten year old pupil was being chased during play in the playground. O'Byrne J. said "In circumstances such as these careful supervision is essential and the persons having charge of the school are bound to see that there is supervision of the playground during play intervals". On the other hand O'Dalaigh C.J. in a 1966 Supreme Court judgement said that "when normal healthy are in the playground it is not necessary that they are under constant supervision". We have noted with interest the judgement of Justice Peart in the recent High Court case of  Wayne Maher  V Presentation Junior School 2004. The judge was very much of the belief that the requirement is for reasonable supervision and he emphasises the in loco parentis rule. The test is clearly what a reasonable parent would have done in the circumstances.

Quick Access:

  • The Role of the Claims Investigator in Ireland
  • Rules of the Road 2007
  • Construction Regulations 2006
  • Training Services
  • The Working at Height Regulations 2006
  • Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2006
  • Role of Loss Adjuster
  • Safety Health and Welfare at Work incl 2005 Act
  • Human Skeleton with labels
  • Map of Ireland
  • Get a copy of our March 2006 Newsletter
  • Witness Statements
  • Courts Act 2004 with Key Changes
  • PIAB with details of Rules, cost, time limits, and a Glossary
  • Action required by Claimants, Employers, Brokers and Insurers in the Irish PIAB Process
  • O'Brien v PIAB [2005]
  • Communications
  • Irish Motor Claims
  • Stopping Distances
  • Overtaking (Motor)
  • Hussey v Twomey [2005]
  • Motorway Rules
  • Recoveries
  • Liability Claims
  • Bullying in Schools
  • 1993 Schools Guidelines
  • Supervision in Schools
  • Maher V Presentation 2004
  • Leixlip Bullying Feb 2006
  • Hatton Principles
  • McGrath V Trintech
  • Equality Legislation
  • Libel and Slander
  • False Arrest
  • Chemical Agents
  • Delays in Litigation
  • Delays in Joining parties
  • Children First - National Child Protection Guidelines
  • Child Protection for Schools (Dept of Ed)
  • The Irish Courts System
  • The District Court
  • The Circuit Court
  • The High Court
  • The Supreme Court
    		•