19 Mar 2025The NSW Supreme Court recently ruled that a school had failed in its legal duty of care for a 14-year-old boy after he suffered an unprovoked attack, even though it occurred outside school hours and beyond the school grounds.
Student attacked outside school gate after end of school day
The former Sydney schoolboy won $1.75 million in damages from the state after he was bashed by a gang of twelve fellow students after school. (Please see T2 (by his tutor T1) v State of New South Wales [2024] NSWSC 1347.)
The attack happened in 2017 and the victim is now an adult.
The court heard the boy was leaving school at the end of the day when another boy told him that a classmate, a 14-year-old boy known in court as XY, wanted to see him.
The boy feared XY and ran back to the school office, only to find it closed. He called his mother, and she twice tried to call the school to warn it, but could only reach an answering machine.
The boy tried to get on a bus outside the school, but a pack of boys surrounded him and walked him to a nearby park, where footage taken on one of the students’ phones showed him being spear-tackled, kicked, punched and stomped in a lengthy bashing.
He was left with serious ear, eye and skull injuries, along with severe psychological damage. Police later found footage of the assault on Instagram.
Victim successfully argues school owed him duty of care
As a 21-year-old, the victim took legal action via his mother against the state of NSW for breaches of the NSW Civil Liability Act 2002. He alleged the state school owed him a duty of care and failed in that duty by not monitoring students where they assembled to board buses after class hours.
A teacher was at the school gates supervising road crossing, but not on the road where students gathered to board buses.
The plaintiff argued successfully that XY, who instigated the attack, was known to have violent tendencies and had just returned from a related suspension, but the school did not conduct a proper risk assessment before XY returned to school.
Associate Justice Joanne Harrison found there were no teachers on bus duty who could have deterred the pack, or intervened when they took the victim to the park to deliver the beating.
Other duty of care breaches included not keeping students safe from bullying, not keeping the school office open after hours for students who needed safety, and not protecting vulnerable students with physical or psychological problems.
In 2012 the victim had been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, which worsened after the attack.
Court finds duty of care extends beyond school grounds and school hours
Lawyers for the state argued it was not liable for the assault, as duty of care did not extend beyond school grounds or outside school hours.
But the court found that the duty of care a school owes its students can extend beyond school grounds and school hours. The court awarded the plaintiff $1.754 million in damages, including medical costs, care and loss of future earnings.
The result of this court decision on the extent of duty of care to vulnerable people should be considered by all employers, as it implies that the duty of care includes ensuring they are safely on their way home after the business day ends, particularly if there is a known risk of harm.
