Posted: 22/05/2012
A recent High Court decision has thrown the spotlight on liability relating to educational and volunteering trips. Mark Lee examines the findings and identifies lessons for educational tour operators in Travel Trade Gazette:
'Educational and volunteering trips usually take place off the beaten trail, which leads to greater potential exposure to lapses in security. One such example is the recent High Court decision involving Adventure Life Signs Limited (ALS). This was a tragic case arising from the rape of three school pupils during a trip to Belize in summer 2005.
Being prepared
ALS assisted the school with the expedition planning and arranged for two experienced, ex-military staff to accompany the group. There was also a teacher in a supervisory role. A hurricane in the area of Mexico where the group was headed meant the itinerary was changed and the group diverted to Belize.
A local company, Maya Walks, was recommended to the ALS staff for project work and accommodation in Belize. The ALS staff made enquiries regarding its credibility, both in Belize and also via their UK office. They also met the owner and his son and reviewed various testimonials and completed a written assessment of the risks posed by the site and the means of dealing with them. Following these investigations, they accepted the offer of free accommodation in return for free labour on site.
On their fourth night, on August 1, 2005, the two claimants and another young woman on the expedition were the victims of a violent attack by the owner’s son. Court proceedings were subsequently initiated in the UK against the school and ALS for damages for psychiatric injury resulting from the assaults.
It was alleged that both the school and the tour operator were vicariously liable for criminal conduct, taking into account a range of factors, which included the planning and supervision of the expedition, the vetting of the accused and also the security provided for the claimants. In particular, they cited alleged incidents of inappropriate behaviour prior to the assaults.
Makings trips easier
In his evidence, the claimants’ expert relied upon the 1998 Good Practice Guide issued by the Department of Education and Employment, entitled 'Health and Safety of Pupils on Educational Visits' ('Haspev'). It should be noted, however, that since December 12, 2011, government advice has changed. The emphasis is now to reduce the burden on schools undertaking trips; to simplify health and safety requirements; and to make it easier for schools to take pupils on trips (by removing paperwork). The guidance now requires teachers to be confident that they know best how to look after pupils and keep them safe.
Managing risk
Both the defendants were exonerated from blame at the conclusion of the trial. The judge concluded that the question of liability depended on whether the leadership team of three were in breach of their duty to exercise reasonable skill and care to keep the volunteers free from foreseeable harm and, specifically, to respond appropriately to indications by the assailant that he posed a risk to the girls because of inappropriate behaviour, particularly on the day before the attack.
The judge was satisfied that ALS had carried out appropriate checks regarding the staff operating the accommodation and also the assailant, both from their UK office and also on location. He also concluded the group was continuously supervised by three responsible and experienced adults. Short of posting a guard on the door of each cabana or implementing an all-night watch system, it would not have been possible to prevent the assault.
He said that it would not be fair, just or reasonable to define the scope of their duties to require them to take any other additional precautions on the night of the attacks. Instead he suggested the claimants were the victims of 'an unscrupulous, determined and skillful attacker'.
It is clear that ALS adopted a thorough approach to risk management, and operators that specialise in educational trips to remote destinations, where there may be limited security, should endeavour to adopt an equally thorough approach.
Contact: Mark Lee
Related services: Travel
© 2024 Penningtons Manches Cooper LLP.
All rights reserved.
Website design by Frontmedia / Dynamic Pear
Penningtons Manches Cooper LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC311575 and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 419867.
Return to news headlines 