Recent years have witnessed several tragedies during school and youth expeditions. This in turn has led to legislation and the tight regulation of Outdoor Activity Centres, with successive governments issuing guidelines for teachers and others supervising such activities. Inevitably there will always be risk in relation to adventurous pursuits in the outdoors, but the law in this area seeks a balance between the educational benefits gained and the need to safeguard against potential hazards. Mythologies have arisen, including the suggestion that a 'blame culture' is so overwhelming that no youth worker or teacher can sensibly engage anymore in such activities.

This succinct guide to the legal position refers to a wide range of outdoor activities and recent legal cases. It demolishes some of the myths, pointing out common pitfalls noted in the research and in the litigation, together with an outline of robust safety features to combat potential hazards.

click here for publisher's site

Comments on the Court of Appeal decision in Co-operative Group (CWS) Ltd v Pritchard on whether the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 permitted a deduction from a supermarket employee's full damages for assault by the store manager on the ground that her behaviour, in going to the store and aggressively confronting the manager after he refused consent for a day's leave, contributed to the loss. 

click here for access via Westlaw [ON CAMPUS]
click here for access via Westlaw [OFF CAMPUS]

Comments on the Court of Appeal judgment in Ali v Bradford City MDC on whether a highway authority could be liable for breaching its statutory duty to protect the public's rights to use the public highway under the Highways Act 1980 s.130 or for nuisance, after the claimant was injured on a public footpath as a result of slipping on steps which were covered with mud, vegetation and other debris.

click here for access via Westlaw [ON CAMPUS]
click here for access via Westlaw [OFF CAMPUS]

Comments on the Court of Appeal judgment in Valentine v Transport for London on whether to overturn the decision to strike out the claim that a highway authority had breached its duty under the Highways Act 1980 s.41 by not maintaining a highway and removing loose debris from the road, actions which were claimed to be the cause of the claimant's death after he drove over the debris and fell from his motorbike. Looks at the liability of the local authority, under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, for its failure to properly carry out a cleansing operation properly.

click here for access via Westlaw [ON CAMPUS]
click here for access via Westlaw [OFF CAMPUS]

Comments on the Queen's Bench Division decision in Tolley v Carr on whether an individual who rescued a woman from a motorway accident but was injured when he returned to her vehicle and attempted to move it as he feared it was a danger to oncoming traffic should have his personal injury damages reduced for contributory negligence. Details the court's review of whether his decision to return to the car was reasonable and discusses the approach of other jurisdictions to granting rescuers immunity from negligence actions.

Comments on the Court of Appeal decision in Yetkin v Newham LBC on whether the trial judge had erred in holding that a highway authority did not owe a duty of care to a careless or negligent road user who suffered personal injury in an accident for which a danger created by the local authority which had positioned shrubs obstructively had been a significant cause. Considers whether the House of Lords decision in Gorringe v Calderdale MBC was confined to cases where the authority had decided not to exercise its statutory powers and so could be distinguished from the present case which involved a negligent exercise of those powers.

click here for access via Westlaw [ON CAMPUS]
click here for access via Westlaw [OFF CAMPUS]

Considers the Court of Appeal judgment in Shah v Ul-Haq on whether it was open to the courts to strike out as an abuse of process the personal injury claims of two claimants following a trial at which it was found that the two claimants had suffered injuries in an accident for which the defendant was liable but also that they had fraudulently supported the claim of a third claimant who was not involved in the accident.

Comments on the Court of Appeal decision in Peters v East Midlands SHA on whether a personal injury claimant was entitled to claim the cost of future care from the tortfeasor and to opt for self-funding and damages in preference to reliance on statutory obligations of public authorities to provide care and accommodation.

click here for access via Westlaw [ON CAMPUS]
click here for access via Westlaw [OFF CAMPUS]

click here for access via Westlaw [ON CAMPUS]
click here for access via Westlaw [OFF CAMPUS]

Designed to ensure you are kept up-to-date with the very latest issues and developments, Education Law Manual looks at the law as it affects further education. It provides clear and practical guidance on the latest legislation, circulars and cases that affect schools, as well as further educational organisations and institutions. The coverage takes in a wide range of legal issues including school admissions and exclusions, special education and child protection, finance and taxation PFI funding, governance and the special provisions in employment law peculiar to the education sector. Tottel's Education Law Manual is an essential service for all solicitors and barristers specialising in education law, as well as local authority legal and educational departments, unions, higher and further educational organisations. Subscribers receive their first year’s updating issues as part of the purchase price (two service issues approx per year), and are then charged annually for subsequent updating.

click here for publisher's site

click here for text, from www.cyclistsdefencefund.org.uk

click here for full text via Blackwells Synergy [ON CAMPUS]
click here for full text via Blackwells Synergy [OFF CAMPUS]