MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7042633305

Precarious liability: The High Court in Lepore, Samin and Rich on school responsibility for assaults by teachers (Case notes)

2003· article· en· W7042633305 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueQueensland's institutional digital repository (The University of Queensland) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Issues in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTortCertaintyPlaintiffSkepticismVicarious liabilityHigh CourtCompensation (psychology)Liability
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In these three cases, heard together, the High Court considered the basis, if any, on which liability for (in particular, sexual) assaults by teachers could be attributed to educational authorities. A strong majority held that, where the teacher was an employee, only vicarious liability is available. Clear sceptical signals were sent to plaintiffs seeking to rely on vicarious liability, although several judgments do countenance such liability if the assault is characterisable as ‘excessive’ disciplinary chastisement. The traditional ‘course of employment’ test may, in line with UK and Canadian authority, be shifting to a ‘sufficiently close connection to the employment’ test — though whether this will be any broader in practice remains to be seen. The judgments also reveal scepticism about non-delegable duties (NDDs). Indeed, two judges explicitly hold that NDDs cannot extend to intentional torts, a finding that re-introduces arbitrary distinctions between victims seeking effective redress. Overall, the cases reinforce the conservative trend in the court's tort jurisprudence, yet fail to provide much doctrinal certainty for either child assault victims or the schooling system. This note concludes by suggesting two options for a fairer approach. Either State authorities should move to oust common law and install a tailored, administrative system to deal with claims in this sensitive area; or the common law could creatively borrow an exacting ‘all reasonable steps’ defence from anti-discrimination legislation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.693
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it