INJURY TO SCHOLAR.

Taranaki Daily News, 29 December 1920, Page 6

INJURY TO SCHOLAR.

EXPLOSION IN CLASS. BOARD NOT RESPONSIBLE. APPEAL COURT DECISION. * "This is a ' very important case," stated IJis Honor the Chief Justice in delivering judgment in Wellington in the Appeal Court case of the Aslvburton High School (appellant) v. Hugh McLean Urquhart (respondent), "and it is the first time that a question of this nature relating to our secondary schools has come before the Court.

t "The respondent, a schoolboy, who ! was being taught aa a pupil in a chemistry class by the science master, was ■ injured by an explosion in the school ! laboratory. The cause of the eaplo--1 sion waa the mixing charcoal with potassium chlorate. The charcoal was ! taken out of a glass jar labelled 'man- ! ganese dioxide,' and, if the substance had ' been as labelled, no explosion would ■ have resulted. The jury has found that ! this was a negligible act." ! The issues put to the jury had been: (1) Was the injury sustained 'by the neglect of the defendant board or the 1 negligence of a servant of the board • (to which a reply in the affirmative had ■ been given); and (2) what damages was ! the defendant entitled to (reply, £800)j 1 It was clear from the evidence that' there was no personal negligence on the • part of the members of the board, unless the board was responsible for the negligence of the science master or of some other official. His Honor traversed the regulations governing the school, and said it was clear that the board had not power to regulate the methods of teaching. That rested entirely with the 1 headmaster, further, there was power under the Education Act, 1914, for any teacher, who was suspended or dismissed, to appeal to a tribunal (the Teachers' Court of Appeal), so that it would be seen the powers of the board had been limited compared with what was granted under section 15 of the Ashhurton High School Act. The cases in which a board such as this had been held liable for the acts of a servant had been those where powers of control were vested in the board. No cases had been eited whre a board such as this, which had officers under it, who were allowed to act without the direct control of the board, had been held liable. Before the respondent could recover, it must 'be said that the school board had power to direct the science master how he was to teach his class. If it could not be so held, the board could not be liable. The scheme adopted by the Minister for Education prevented the board interfering with the methods of chemistry of the scienc6 teacher; so that it could not be held that the case, Smith v. Martin, and others, was an authority in this casa. His Honor was not aware of any case th«t could be cited to say that the maxim of "respondent superior" would apply in this case; and that, in his opinion. disposed pf the case.

The appeal -would bo allowed, with costs on the highest scale Mr. Justice Edwards, Mr. Justice Cooper, and Mr. Justice Chapman agreed. Mr. C. P. vSkcrrett. K.C., and Mr. Purnell received judgment for the appellant, and Messrs. Alpers and Wanklyn f '• the respondent.