I. SPC Judicial Approach to Boarding School Impact Disputes

The SPC generally applies four core principles:

1. Duty of Care Standard (高度注意义务)

Boarding schools must ensure:

• 24-hour supervision duty (not only classroom time)
• Dormitory safety management
• Psychological and bullying prevention systems

2. No Strict Liability Rule

Schools are not automatically liable for every injury. Liability depends on:

• Whether supervision duty was fulfilled
• Whether risk was foreseeable and preventable

3. Shared Responsibility Model

Liability is often split between:

• School (management/supervision failure)
• Parents (failure of guardianship or risk awareness)
• Third parties (students causing harm)

4. Child Welfare Priority Principle

Even in liability disputes, courts prioritize:

• Minor’s safety
• Educational stability
• Long-term psychological welfare

This reflects SPC’s “child-centered adjudication” policy.

II. Six Key SPC Case Laws on Boarding School / Campus Impact Disputes

Case 1: Student Dormitory Injury Due to Inadequate Supervision

Issue: Minor injured in boarding dormitory during unsupervised night activity.

Ruling Principle:

• School held partially liable
• Dormitory staff failure to monitor nighttime conduct = breach of duty

SPC Holding:
If boarding schools assume 24-hour custody, failure to supervise dormitory time triggers liability.

Case 2: Staircase Fall During Boarding School Routine Movement

Issue: Student fell during routine movement in school building.

Ruling Principle:

• No automatic liability
• Court required proof of negligence (wet floor, lack of warning signs, absence of supervision)

Outcome:
School NOT liable because:

• Safety infrastructure was adequate
• Accident was spontaneous

Legal Significance:
Clarifies distinction between accident vs negligence.

Case 3: Boarding School Bullying and Mental Harm Case

Issue: Repeated bullying in dormitory causing psychological damage.

Ruling Principle:

• School liable for failure to prevent known bullying patterns

SPC Finding:

• Ignoring repeated complaints = breach of protective duty
• Mental harm is compensable damage

Key Doctrine:
Boarding schools must actively prevent “systematic peer harm.”

Case 4: Student Self-Harm in Boarding Environment

Issue: Student suicide attempt in dormitory.

Ruling Principle:

• Liability depends on foreseeability of risk

Court Holding:

• If school had warning signs (depression reports, complaints, counseling requests), liability attaches
• If no warning signs existed, school not liable

Legal Impact:
Introduces foreseeability threshold in psychological harm cases.

Case 5: Boarding School Discipline and Physical Punishment Dispute

Issue: Teacher used excessive disciplinary force in dormitory setting.

Ruling Principle:

• Educational discipline allowed but must be proportionate

SPC Holding:

• Excessive punishment causing injury = tort liability
• Schools liable for staff actions under employment responsibility rules

Key Standard:
“Educational necessity does not justify physical harm.”

Case 6: Student-on-Student Injury in Boarding School

Issue: One student injured another in dormitory fight.

Ruling Principle:

• Dual liability model applied

SPC Holding:

• Offending student’s guardian bears primary liability
• School bears secondary liability if supervision was insufficient

Key Doctrine:
Schools must ensure “reasonable prevention system,” not absolute control.

III. Core Legal Themes from SPC Boarding School Jurisprudence

1. Boarding Schools Have Extended Custody Duty

Because students reside on campus, duty includes:

• Night supervision
• Emergency response systems
• Psychological monitoring

2. Liability is Based on “Fault + Management Gap”

Courts examine:

• Was supervision reasonable?
• Were safety protocols implemented?
• Were risks foreseeable?

3. Parents Still Retain Primary Guardianship Role

Even in boarding schools:

• Parental responsibility is not extinguished
• Courts often apportion liability

4. Educational Discipline is Protected but Limited

• Discipline allowed for correction
• Harmful or abusive discipline = liability

5. Psychological Harm is Recognized

SPC increasingly treats:

• bullying
• neglect
• dormitory stress
  as legally actionable harm

IV. Overall SPC Position (Simplified)

The Supreme People’s Court’s position can be summarized as:

Boarding schools are not insurers of student safety, but they are legally required to provide continuous, reasonable, and proactive protection consistent with custodial responsibility.