Child Injury Law under Personal Injury
Child Injury Law under Personal Injury
Overview
Child Injury Law within the realm of personal injury deals with injuries sustained by children due to negligence or wrongful acts of others. Since children are legally vulnerable, courts apply special considerations when assessing duty of care, negligence, and liability in cases involving children.
Key Legal Principles
Duty of Care to Children
Adults, institutions, and others owe children a higher standard of care because children are less capable of recognizing risks and protecting themselves.
Standard of Care
The standard is generally that of a “reasonable person” taking into account the child’s age, maturity, and capacity. When a child is the defendant (in rare cases), the standard adjusts to that of a reasonable child of similar age and intelligence.
Foreseeability
Injury to children must be reasonably foreseeable for liability to arise.
Contributory Negligence and Assumption of Risk
Children’s contributory negligence is assessed based on their age and understanding. Young children are often presumed incapable of negligence.
Duty of Care Owed to Children
Parents and Guardians owe a duty to supervise and care.
Schools, Teachers, and Caregivers owe a duty to provide a safe environment and proper supervision.
Occupiers of Premises must ensure their property is safe, especially where children are likely to be present.
Manufacturers and Product Sellers must ensure products are safe for children.
Standard of Care and Age Consideration
The law recognizes that children are less experienced and less aware of danger.
For example, if a 5-year-old trespasses on land and gets injured, the owner’s duty is different than for an adult trespasser.
When children engage in activities, such as playing sports, schools and supervisors must act reasonably, balancing risks and safety.
Important Case Law
1. Mullin v Richards [1998] 1 WLR 1304
Facts: Two 15-year-old girls were fighting with plastic rulers, and one girl’s eye was injured when a ruler broke.
Issue: Whether the defendant girl breached the standard of care expected.
Judgment: The court held that the defendant should be judged by the standard of a reasonable 15-year-old, not an adult. The defendant was not negligent.
Principle: The standard of care for children defendants is that of a reasonable child of the same age and experience.
2. Glasgow Corporation v Taylor [1922] 1 AC 44
Facts: A 7-year-old child ate poisonous berries in a public park maintained by the local authority and died.
Issue: Whether the authority owed a duty to keep the park safe from hidden dangers.
Judgment: The House of Lords held the authority liable. Children are attracted to such dangers (like berries), so reasonable steps should be taken to prevent injury.
Principle: Occupiers must guard against hidden dangers likely to attract children (“Attractive Nuisance Doctrine”).
3. Phipps v Rochester Corporation [1955] 1 QB 450
Facts: A young child was injured playing near a construction site.
Issue: Whether the local authority was liable for failing to fence off the site.
Judgment: The court ruled no liability as the child was very young and it was expected that young children should be under parental supervision.
Principle: There are limits to the duty of care based on the child’s age and parental responsibility.
4. Topp v London Country Bus [1993] 1 WLR 976
Facts: A bus was left unattended with keys inside and was stolen by children who caused an accident.
Issue: Whether the bus company was negligent.
Judgment: The court held no liability as the risk was not reasonably foreseeable.
Principle: Not all injuries caused by children’s actions will lead to liability unless risk is foreseeable.
Application in Practice
Schools must assess risks and provide supervision proportionate to children’s ages.
Landowners should secure dangerous areas or warn children.
Products marketed to children must be safe and include warnings.
Courts often consider the child’s own actions but usually give them some leeway due to immaturity.
Summary
Children have special protection under personal injury law.
Duty of care is high, but balanced with the child’s age and capability.
The standard of care varies depending on who is responsible and the circumstances.
Case law shapes how courts assess negligence and liability involving children.
Parents and caregivers also have roles in preventing injury.
RELATED Blog
0 comments