School ordered to pay damages for failing to address bullying case
MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court has ordered a school to pay P650,000 in damages and attorney’s fees for its failure to address a bullying incident during class eight years ago.
“By failing to address the harm committed by one student against another and by negligently handling the punching incident after it had already happened, Mother Goose School failed to exercise the diligence of a good father of the family in providing a safe learning environment to its students,” the Supreme Court said in a decision written by Associate Justice Mario V. Lopez.
The incident happened during a computer class when an argument about a mechanical pencil led to two students repeatedly punching a classmate while the teacher was in the comfort room.
READ: DepEd probes alleged student bullying in Quezon City
Despite reporting the incident, no action was taken, prompting the parents to raise the matter to the school’s administration. However, the school concluded that the incident was mere “teasing” or “rough play” and took no disciplinary action.
The victim’s parents then filed a complaint for damages against the school, teachers, and other students’ parents.
The Regional Trial Court ruled that both the school and the teacher-in-charge were both liable stressing their duty of protecting the students during school hours.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s ruling but cleared the teacher who was not in the classroom when the incident occurred.
The Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeals’ ruling stating that the school was negligent for its lack of proper protocols, failure to inform the victim’s parents promptly, and inaccuracies in its investigation.
“Notably, every parent who entrusts their child to a learning institution does so with the assurance that the school, owing to its obligation not only to provide but also to maintain a safe learning environment, will protect the child from harm or will promptly address similar incidents after its occurrence,” the Supreme Court said.
The Court also recognized the incident as bullying in its general sense and not as defined under the Anti-Bullying Act of 2013, which was not yet in effect at the time.
