Educational Negligence: Is It a Viable Form of Action?

  • Mui Kim TehEmail author
  • Charles J. Russo


In the current climate of setting professional standards for the teaching profession, the question arises as to whether schools have a duty of care to students with regard to educational outcomes. Thus, an issue of growing concern for lawyers, judges, and educators in the US, England and Australia is educational malpractice or negligence. But courts have been largely unresponsive when plaintiffs raise claims of this nature. As one American judge pithily noted, educational malpractice “is a tort beloved of commentators but not of courts.” Against this background, this chapter examines legal developments on educational malpractice in the US, England and Australia, and then discusses the impact of setting professional standards for teaching. It concludes with reflections on the future, if any, for claims of educational malpractice.


Tort Educational negligence Duty of care Professional standards 


  1. Abela v State of Victoria [2013] FCA 832.Google Scholar
  2. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2013). 1220.0 – ANZSCO – Australian and New Zealand standard classification of occupations, version 1.2. Retrieved from
  3. Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL). (2011). National professional standards for teachers. Retrieved from
  4. B.M. v State, 649 P.2d 425 (Mont. 1982).Google Scholar
  5. Babie, P., Russo, C. J., & Dickinson, G. M. (2004). Supervision of students: An exploratory comparative analysis. Australia & New Zealand Journal of Law and Education, 9(1), 41–70.Google Scholar
  6. BBC. (2001, October 1). School sued over poor results. Retrieved from
  7. Bell v Board of Educ. of the City of W.Haven, 739 A.2d 321(Conn. Ct. App. 1999).Google Scholar
  8. Civil Liability Act 1936 (SA).Google Scholar
  9. Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW).Google Scholar
  10. Civil Liability Act 2002 (Tas).Google Scholar
  11. Civil Liability Act 2002 (WA).Google Scholar
  12. Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld).Google Scholar
  13. Commonwealth v Introvigne. (1982). 150 CLR 258.Google Scholar
  14. Cox v. State of New South Wales (2007) NSWSC 471.Google Scholar
  15. Cumming, J. J. (2009). Assessment challenges, the law and the future. In C. Wyatt-Smith & J. J. Cumming (Eds.), Educational assessment in the 21st century – Connecting theory and practice (pp. 157–179). London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. D.S.W. v Fairbanks North Star Borough Sch. Dist., 628 P.2d 554 (Alaska 1981).Google Scholar
  17. Dale, A. (2011, June 1). Parents must pay up – Court rules Roseville college did enough to help daughters. The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved from
  18. DeMitchell, T. A., DeMitchell, T. A., & Gagnon, D. (2012). Teacher effectiveness and value-added modelling: Building a pathway to educational malpractice? Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal, 2, 257–301.Google Scholar
  19. Department of Education. (2011). Teachers’ standards: Guidance for school leaders, school staff and governing bodies. Retrieved from
  20. Disability Discrimination Act. (1992). Retrieved from
  21. Donohue v. Copiague Union Free Sch. Dist., 418 N.Y.S.2d 375 (N.Y. 1979).Google Scholar
  22. Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562.Google Scholar
  23. Eckes, S. E., Decker, J. R., & Richardson, E. N. (2012). Trends in court opinions involving negligence in K-12 schools: Considerations for teachers and administrators. West’s Education Law Reporter, 275, 505.Google Scholar
  24. Elson, J. (1978). A common law remedy for the educational harms caused by incompetent or careless teaching. Northwestern University Law Review, 73, 641–771.Google Scholar
  25. Foster, W. F. (1985). Educational malpractice: A Tort for the untaught? University of British Columbia Law Review, 19, 161–244.Google Scholar
  26. Funston, R. (1980–1981). Educational malpractice: A cause of action in search of a theory. San Diego Law Review, 18, 743–812.Google Scholar
  27. Geyer v Downs. (1977). 138 CLR 90.Google Scholar
  28. Grant Mears v Sydney Anglican Schools Corporation [2016] NSWCA 39.Google Scholar
  29. Hannan, E. (2006, August 15). School payout for boy’s reading failure. The Australian, p. 1.Google Scholar
  30. Hoffman v. Board of Educ., 424 N.Y.S.2d 376 (N.Y. 1979).Google Scholar
  31. Hudson, F. (2008, March 16). Father wants refund on Brighton Grammar school fees. Sunday Herald Sun. Retrieved from
  32. Hunter v. Board of Educ. of Montgomery Cnty., 439 A.2d 582 (Md.1982).Google Scholar
  33. Hutt, E., & Tang, A. (2013). The new education malpractice litigation. Virginia Law Review, 99(3), 419–492.Google Scholar
  34. Jamieson, L. S. (1991). Educational malpractice: A lesson in professional accountability. Boston College Law Review, 32(4), 899–965.Google Scholar
  35. Keeton, W. P., Dobbs, D. B., Keeton, R. E., & Owen, D. G. (1984). Prosser and Keeton on the law of Torts (5th ed.). St Paul: West Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  36. Maglan, C. (2016, October 27). Judge dismisses lawsuit challenging Minnesota teachers union protections. Duluth News Tribune (MN) at A 9, 2016 WLNR 32881528.Google Scholar
  37. March v E & M H Stramare Pty Ltd (1991) 171 CLR 506.Google Scholar
  38. Matos, A. (2016, April 14). Lawsuit accuses Minnesota of protecting bad teachers at expense of students. Minneapolis-St. Paul, Star Tribune. Retrieved from
  39. Mawdsley, R. D., & Cumming, J. J. (2008a). Educational malpractice and setting damages for ineffective teaching: A comparison of legal principles in the USA, England and Australia. Education and the Law, 20(1), 25–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mawdsley, R. D., & Cumming, J. J. (2008b). The origins and development of education law as a separate field of law in the United States and Australia. Australia and New Zealand Journal of Law & Education, 13(2), 7–20.Google Scholar
  41. Mawdsley, R. D., & Mawdsley, J. L. (2012). Should educational malpractice be actionable? In C. J. Russo (Ed.), School law (pp. 213–227). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  42. Mears v Sydney Anglican Schools Corporation [2013] NSWSC 535; Mears v Sydney Anglican schools corporation (No. 2)[2013] NSWSC 876.Google Scholar
  43. Moore v Vanderloo, 386 N.W.2d 108 (Iowa 1986).Google Scholar
  44. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Miller Steamship Co Pty Ltd (Wagon Mound (No 2))[1967] AC 617.Google Scholar
  45. Oyston v St Patrick’s College [2013] NSWCA 135.Google Scholar
  46. Peter W v. San Francisco Unified Sch. Dist., 131 Cal. Rptr. 854 (Cal. Ct. App. 1976).Google Scholar
  47. Phelps v Hillingdon London Borough Council [1999] 1 W.L.R. 500.Google Scholar
  48. Phelps v London Borough of Hillingdon [2001] 2 AC 619.Google Scholar
  49. Raethel, S. (1996, April 11). Pupils sue over missing lessons. Sydney Morning Herald, p. 3.Google Scholar
  50. Ramsay, I. (1988). Educational negligence and the legalisation of education. University of New South Wales Law Journal, 11, 184–218.Google Scholar
  51. Ramsay v Larsen. (1964). 111 CLR 16.Google Scholar
  52. Roads and Traffic Authority v Royal [2008] HCA 19.Google Scholar
  53. Sarre, R. (2008). Fairness in trading: Trade practices law and school governance. AISSA School Board Governance Journal, 11, 1–4.Google Scholar
  54. Sisters of the Holy Child Jesus at Old Westbury v. Corwin, 29 N.Y.S.3d 736 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016).Google Scholar
  55. Smith v. Alameda Cnty. Social Servs. Agency, 153 Cal.Rptr. 712 (Cal. Ct. App. 1979).Google Scholar
  56. Tokic, S. (2014). Rethinking educational malpractice: Are educators rock stars? Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal, 3(1), 105–133.Google Scholar
  57. Torres v Little Flower, 485 N.Y.S.2d 15 (N.Y.1984).Google Scholar
  58. Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth).Google Scholar
  59. Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Canberra and Goulburn v Hadba [2005] HCA 31.Google Scholar
  60. Weir v Geelong Grammar School (Civil Claims) [2012] VCAT 1736.Google Scholar
  61. Williams v. Eady. (1893). 10 TLR 41 CA.Google Scholar
  62. Wrongs Act (Vic) 1958.Google Scholar
  63. Wyong Shire Council v Shirt (1980) 146 CLR 40.Google Scholar
  64. Yee Tak On v Dr Linda Hort (ANU College) [2012] FMCA 391.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Deakin UniversityGeelongAustralia
  2. 2.Panzer Chair in Education and Research Professor of LawUniversity of DaytonDaytonUSA

Personalised recommendations