Field Trips – Legal liability
Tom Baker
Beachcroft LLP
Liability in Negligence – The Basics
 University employees owe a duty to exercise reasonable care and
skill in protecting students from reasonably foreseeable harm.
 Persons exercising a particular skill or profession owe a higher
duty of care.
 If it is established that this duty has been breached, the next
question to ask is ‘did the breach cause any harm to the student’?
 If so, the duty only extends to harm that is reasonably foreseeable.
 If all these elements are met an employee can be personally liable.
 Liability can be extended to a situation where someone has
negligently assumed responsibility
Vicarious Liability
 More often than not a claim is pursued against the
employer (University) rather than its employee as the
University is insured.
 For the University to be liable the employee must be
acting in the ordinary course of their employment.
 The employer is only liable for the acts of the employee
once the duty of care has been established.
Limits on liability
 The difficulty is determining where the boundaries of
that liability lie.
 The University is not liable for failing to control the
private lives of students.
 The University will not be liable for things outside its
control.
 The duty of care does not extend to unsupervised
leisure time.
Case Law
Erin Leigh McLean v The University of St Andrews
 McLean removed herself from the ‘admitted duty of
care which the defenders had towards the pursuer’.
 Reasonable care and foreseeability are the key factors
in determining liability.
Tuttle v Edinburgh University
 A warning is no substitute for proper training.
Radcliff v McConnell
 Obvious dangerous behaviour / pranks should not lead
to a liability
Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974
 Employers (Universities) must ensure the health, safety and
welfare of all their employees (not students). This extends to the
provision of information, training and supervision.
 They are under a duty to prepare a written statement of general
policy with respect to the health and safety at work of employees.
 The University must conduct its business so as not to put students
at risk in relation to their health or safety. They should provide them
with information about such things which may affect their health
and safety.
 Employees have a duty to take reasonable care for their own
safety and those affected by their acts and to cooperate with the
university with regard to health and safety requirements.
Management of Health and Safety at Work
Regulations 1999
 The duty of care is defined more explicitly as a duty of
line management.
 It is the responsibility of the governing body of a
University and the Heads of School to make a suitable
and sufficient risk assessments.
 This duty is often delegated to staff organising the trip
who must be sufficiently competent.
 Students and staff should be fully informed of the
nature of the work and the associated hazards.
 There is a separate requirement that staff should be
fully trained.
UCAE: Guidance on Safety in Fieldwork (1)
 This booklet outlines the necessary steps to be taken
for the safe management of fieldwork. If this guidance is
followed it will help to show the duty of care has been
discharged.
 must carry out a suitable and sufficient risk
assessment.
 identify areas that present particular problems and act
to remove risks or to reduce them to an acceptable
level.
 contingency planning for reasonably foreseeable
emergencies must be made.
UCAE: Guidance on Safety in Fieldwork (2)
 In light of the results of the risk assessment, a safe
system of work should be devised and discussed. Field
trip supervisors must be authorised and competent.
 Any field trips need to be adequately supervised.
 It is important that personnel are adequately trained for
field trips.
 Students should be issued with a written code of
behaviour before the field trip begins, reminding them of
their responsibilities to the University, staff and fellow
students.
Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate
Homicide Act 2007
 Comes into force on 6 April 2008 and creates a new offence of
Corporate Manslaughter.
 An organisation is guilty if there has been a gross breach of the
relevant duty of care owed to the deceased.
 The relevant duty of care is the same as has already been
discussed under the law of negligence.
 In deciding if the breach is gross the jury can review the
organisations culture and attitude to health and safety.
 Penalties upon conviction include an unlimited fine, a remedial
order and a publicity order.
 Organisations can also face Health and Safety prosecutions.
Summary





Be active in monitoring the Universities trips
Carry out risk assessments!
Get the appropriate person to risk assess
Train employees!
Use written explanations of trips and give written
warnings of any risks
 Bring in the experts for serious incidents asap
 Avoid risks if possible but let’s still encourage field trips
 Take out the appropriate insurance!