attending to another child, who had fallen and injured himself. The majority of their Lordships were of the view that there was no negligence on the part of the teacher but the council were personally negligent in the system they operated. The following extracts are taken from the judgment of Lord Tucker, starting at p 568:

doi:10.4324/9781843140504-70

Chapter

attending to another child, who had fallen and injured himself. The majority of their Lordships were of the view that there was no negligence on the part of the teacher but the council were personally negligent in the system they operated. The following extracts are taken from the judgment of Lord Tucker, starting at p 568:

Chapter

ABSTRACT

My Lords, such an occurrence I think calls for an explanation from the appellants. Not because the facts and circumstances are exclusively within their knowledge – a theory to which I do not subscribe – but because it was an event which should not have happened and which prima facie indicates negligence on the part of those in charge of the child just as much as the presence of a motor car on the foot pavement prima facie points to negligence on the part of the driver.