You are on page 1of 7

RUNNING HEAD: ANALYSIS OF STUDENT DRIVER CASE 1

Learning Task 1

An Analysis of the Student Drivers Case

Khadija Akbar, Rashda Bibi, Asha Noble, Avneet Sekhon,

Tahmina Sherwani, and Sabahat Zia

EDUC 525

Werklund School of Education

University of Calgary

Dr. J. K. Donlevy

October, 18, 2018


The student Driver Case 2

The Facts:

This paper analyzes the facts of the “Student Drivers” case. On Tuesday, June 9th, 2001,

a vehicular accident occurred 30 km outside of Okotoks that left a 15-year-old with life-changing

injuries. Upon examination of the facts, we are considering Prim Irwin as the plaintiff who

became a quadriplegic because of the catastrophic road accident. Based on our examination of

the facts, the following are being considered as liable: Lindsay Waterman, the teacher in

supervision at the time of the incident, the school principal, and Amanda Ballard, the registered

owner and driver of the vehicle. Prim Irwin is being held accountable under contributory

negligence. To determine who is liable for the damages suffered by the plaintiff, we will use the

tort of negligence to hold the defendants accountable.

Lindsay Waterman:

Irwin and Ballard were both students participating in a field trip under the supervision of

Waterman. According to Alberta School Act Section 18.1.f, "A teacher while providing

instructions or supervision must maintain order and discipline-under the direction of the

principal- among the students while they are in the school or on the school grounds and while

they are attending or participating in activities sponsored or approved by the board"(p 26).

Furthermore, considering “in Loco Parentis” principle, Waterman should act like a caring

parent. Thus, duty of care exists for Lindsay Waterman.

According to Trudeau High School Directive # 1, secondary school students can drive

private vehicles transporting other students to school sponsored activities during school hours

only within the town boundaries. Thus, in compliance with the school’s policy of transportation

in private vehicles, it was Lindsay watermen’s responsibility to make sure that the activity’s site
The student Driver Case 3

(Maribelle Resort Golf Course) is located within the town’ limits before allowing the student to

carpool with other student. In the directive of the school, when driving to and from physical

education activities, students are expected to wear seat belts. Thus, it was the teacher’s duty to

ensure that all the students were wearing seatbelts. In doing so she would have noticed that

Irwin’s seat belt was not working properly or was not functional at all and made an alternative

travel arrangement for her as per school policy. In this case especially the teacher needed to be

super cautious as the students were driving on the highway where the speed limit is 100 Km/hour

compared to 40 Km/ hour within the town.

Although, Waterman was assured that Ballard had a valid driver’s license, Waterman

vicariously violated her standard of care towards the plaintiff as Waterman did not consider the

Transportation Guidelines for Students which only allows students to drive their personal

vehicles within city limits (Donlevy, n.d.).

Any reasonable prudent parent would be able to foresee that driving on highway at the

speed limit of 100 Km/hour offers greater risks and that “students must be instructed in advance

on all aspects of safety during the field trip, and all foreseeable dangers should be brought to the

students’ attention” (ATA, 2013, p30). But for had Watermen been aware that the activity site is

located outside the town’s boundaries and followed the school transportation guidelines for

students; the accident could have been avoided altogether (Donlevy, n.d.).

School Principal:

Under Alberta School Act, the school principal must provide a “caring and safe

environment” (s 20.a), “direct the management of the school” (s 20.e) and “maintain order and

discipline during the activities approved by the board” (s 20.f). Furthermore, it is duty of teachers
The student Driver Case 4

and administrators to determine the adequate amount of supervision (ATA, 2013, p27). Thus,

the duty of care exists for the school principal.

The school principal vicariously infringed upon the standard of care she had towards the

plaintiff in the sense as principal did not enforce the School Directive which only allows students

to drive and carpool only within city limits and with their seatbelts worn all the time (Donlevy,

n.d.). As the administrator of the school, the principal ought to know the exact location of the

proposed activity site and would be able to foresee the potential risks associated with driving at

highway before approving the activity. But For the school principal’s inability to implement the

School Directive, the accident could not have occurred.

Amanda Ballard:

As the registered owner and driver of the car, Ballard had a duty of care to protect

herself, her passengers, as well as those whom she was sharing the road with. It was also her

statutory responsibility as a licensed driver to not drive carelessly on the road according to the

section 115(1) (a) (b) of the Traffic Safety Act of Alberta (2008, p. 131).

Ballard failed to provide an appropriate standard of care to Irwin as her passenger in her

car by not informing her about the faulty seatbelt. According to the Alberta occupant restraint

program, Alberta’s Traffic Safety Act: Vehicle Equipment Regulations Part 5 and the Federal

Motor Vehicle Safety Act, state that “it is the driver’s responsibility to ensure that all passengers

under the age of 16 years are properly restrained in the vehicle” (2018, para. 2). However,

Ballard still allowed Irwin to sit in the seat with the faulty seatbelt. Ballard could have told Irwin

to sit in the rear passenger seat; however, she did not. Therefore, Ballard disregarded her

common law duty to protect her passenger when Irwin was riding with her in her vehicle.
The student Driver Case 5

Furthermore, a registered driver with a valid driver’s license should be able to foresee the

dangers associated with not wearing a seatbelt. A reasonable, prudent individual would be aware

of the importance of using a seatbelt in terms of injury prevention and its role in limiting risks

associated with potential road accidents. Thus, Ballard was obligated to ask her passenger to sit

in the back seat of the vehicle instead. But for, Ballard driving the vehicle while knowing that

Irwin was not safely secured, the injuries could have been limited or avoided. Ballard did not

take the initiative to protect her passenger from the risks associated with driving while unsecured

and therefore is negligent. She is found guilty of dangerous driving causing bodily harm under

the section 115. 2. (b) of Alberta Traffic safety Act.

Prim Irwin:

Irwin is held accountable under contributory negligence for undermining the standard

of care she had towards herself as an individual by making the decision of not wearing a

seatbelt. Irwin is also responsible for her own injury because she was aware of the

malfunctioning seat belt as she overheard Amanda saying, “there is some problem with the belt”

(Donlevy, n.d.). However, she overlooked her duty of care to herself as she did not take on the

responsibility of asking Ballard whether she had repaired the seatbelt or not. A reasonable,

prudent individual would be able to foresee the negative consequences associated with not

wearing a seatbelt. Irwin should have taken a stand for her own safety and sat in the rear seat of

the car where there was a functioning seatbelt. But for, had Irwin sat in the back seat of the car

when she suspected the front seatbelt to be faulty, the injuries could have been prevented

altogether, or at the very least been minimized (Car rollover 101, 2014).
The student Driver Case 6

Volenti non fit injuria also applies to Irwin because she was aware of the

malfunctioning seat belt, and still chose to sit in that seat. Hence, she accepted the risks

associated with not safely securing herself while riding in the vehicle. Therefore, along with the

defendants, Irwin is also liable for both non-pecuniary and pecuniary damages. This would

include medical expenses, loss of future opportunities, and the suffering she has suffered and will

continue to suffer throughout her life as a quadriplegic.

Conclusion:

After analyzing the facts, we have concluded that in addition to the damages of pain and

suffering, Irwin may entitle to the damages of disability and loss of future opportunities of

earnings as the accident has left her quadriplegic. The defendants Lindsay Waterman, the school

principal, and Amanda Ballard under joint liability are 70 % liable for the damages suffered by

the plaintiff because they have clearly accounted for all five elements of negligence. Amanda

Ballard failed to fulfill her common law duty towards her passenger by not informing her about

the faulty seatbelt or suggesting that Irwin sit in the back seat. Lindsay Waterman and the school

principal are deemed negligent towards the plaintiff because of violating the School District

Policy and for their inability to ensure that the vehicle in question was safe. However, it should

be noted that the section 60 (1) b. iv of the School Act protects the principal and the teacher from

individual liability in the event of a lawsuit (p.59). Finally, the plaintiff, Prim Irwin did not take

responsibility for her own safety causing her to be contributorily negligent. Thus, she is 30%

liable for the damages she suffered.


The student Driver Case 7

References

Alberta Occupant Restraint Program. Retrieved from

http://albertaseatbelts.ca/resources-legislation/the-law/

Alberta School Act (2018). Retrieved from http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/acts/s03.pdf

Alberta Teachers’ Association (2013). Teachers’ rights, responsibilities and legal liabilities.

Retrieved from

https://www.teachers.ab.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/ATA/Publications/Teachers-as-

Professionals/MON-2%20Teachers%20Rights.pdf

Car rollover 101: How rollovers happen and what you can do to avoid one. (April, 2014).

Retrieved from http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/02/rollover-101/index.htm

Donlevy, J. (n.d.) Student Drivers [Class handout]. Calgary: Werklund School of Education.

Traffic Safety Act (2018). Province of Alberta, Alberta Queen’s Printer. Retrieved from

http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/t06.pdf

You might also like