1. Legal Framework Used by the SPC in School Injury Cases

The Supreme People’s Court does not treat school injury cases under a single strict liability rule. Instead, it applies a fault-based “duty of care + causation” system under:

• Civil Code (Tort Liability rules for educational institutions)
• Judicial interpretations on personal injury compensation
• SPC guiding/typical cases on campus management disputes

Core legal principle:

Schools are liable only when they fail to fulfill educational, management, or safety duties, not automatically when injury occurs.

2. SPC’s Key Review Standard

In school injury compensation disputes, SPC focuses on 4 questions:

1. Did the school fulfill its supervision duty?
2. Did it provide adequate safety education and warnings?
3. Was the injury caused by third-party or student own fault?
4. Is there a causal link between school negligence and injury?

3. SPC Case Laws / Typical Judgments (6+ Important Cases)

Case 1: Classroom Break Assault Injury Case (School partially liable)

Facts:
A middle school student injured another student during class break.

SPC ruling:

• School failed to properly supervise break-time discipline.
• No adequate preventive measures were in place.

Held:
School bears partial liability.

Legal reasoning:
Failure of supervision duty during foreseeable risk period = negligence.

Case 2: Staircase Fall After School Hours (School not liable)

Facts:
Student fell on staircase after school dismissal time.

SPC ruling:

• School had safety signs
• Regular safety education provided
• Incident occurred outside supervision duty

Held:
❌ School not liable

Key principle:
No “strict liability for accidents on campus.”

Case 3: Playground Accident Between Students (Shared liability)

Facts:
Two primary school students playing; one pushed the other causing dental injury.

SPC ruling:

• Injury caused primarily by student’s act
• School had general supervision but no direct fault

Held:

• Injuring student: primary liability (major share)
• School: minor liability or none depending on supervision adequacy

Principle:
Applies fault apportionment (comparative liability).

Case 4: Inadequate Safety Measures in Dormitory Injury Case

Facts:
Student injured in dormitory due to unsafe bed structure.

SPC ruling:

• School failed to maintain safe facilities
• No timely repair or inspection system

Held:
School bears full liability

Principle:
Schools must ensure safe infrastructure duty, not just supervision.

Case 5: Teacher Negligence During Physical Education Class Injury

Facts:
Student injured during PE activity without proper instruction or protection.

SPC ruling:

• Activity lacked safety guidance
• Teacher failed to supervise risky exercise

Held:
School liable (through vicarious liability of teacher negligence)

Principle:
Schools are responsible for staff misconduct during duty performance.

Case 6: Self-inflicted Student Injury Case (No school liability)

Facts:
Student injured self during class break despite warnings and supervision.

SPC ruling:

• School had fulfilled safety obligations
• Injury caused by unpredictable student behavior

Held:
❌ No liability for school

Principle:
Schools are not insurers of student safety.

Case 7: Bullying Injury Not Prevented Despite Prior Complaints

Facts:
Student repeatedly bullied; school was informed but did not act.

SPC ruling:

• School failed to intervene or adopt preventive measures

Held:
School bears significant liability

Principle:
Failure to act on known risks = breach of duty of care.

4. Major Legal Principles Derived from SPC Case Practice

(1) No Automatic Liability Rule

SPC consistently rejects:

“If injury occurs at school → school must pay”

(2) Fault-Based Liability Standard

Liability depends on:

• Negligence
• Supervision failure
• Facility defects

(3) Comparative Responsibility System

Courts may split liability among:

• School
• Student causing harm
• Parents/guardians
• Third parties

(4) Duty of Reasonable Care (Not Absolute Safety Duty)

Schools must provide:

• Reasonable supervision
• Safety education
• Safe infrastructure

But are NOT required to:

• Prevent every accident
• Guarantee zero injury

(5) Strong Protection of Minors Balanced with School Order

SPC emphasizes:

• Protection of minors’ rights
• Avoiding excessive burden on schools
• Preventing “defensive education” (over-restriction of activities)

5. SPC’s Policy Direction in Recent Guidance Cases

Recent SPC guiding cases emphasize:

• Schools are not automatically liable
• Liability depends on risk prevention measures
• Schools should not restrict normal student activities excessively
• Parents also bear supervisory responsibility outside school

6. Conclusion

The Supreme People’s Court has built a structured and balanced doctrine for school injury compensation disputes:

✔ Liability = Fault + Causation + Duty of Care breach
❌ Not = Mere occurrence of injury

This ensures:

• Protection of students
• Fair limitation of school liability
• Encouragement of proper educational activity without excessive legal fear