The Court held that a school principal who, within one to two minutes of learning an aggressive parent intended to confront a teacher, dispatched two deputy principals and contacted the school-based police officer did not breach the employer's duty of care, even though the principal did not activate a lockdown, physically restrain the parent, or telephone the teacher directly. On the facts, activating a lockdown before school commenced would likely have caused teachers to exit staffrooms and expose themselves to greater danger, and physical ejection was unreasonable where the parent had not yet been physically violent and an experienced police officer assessed de-escalation as the appropriate response. The Court further held that even if breach were established, factual causation under s 305D(1)(a) was not proven because the teacher received a contemporaneous warning from a colleague and was at all times within a locked room, such that a telephone warning would not have materially altered the outcome. Damages were assessed at $678,307.30 but judgment was entered for the defendant on liability.
The full text is available to signed-in members.