An 18-Year-old has when warming up in the school sports of a headache, he collapses against a wall, is responsive. The teacher alerted the ambulance. But until it comes, pass away valuable minutes.
“When the ambulance Arrives already eight-minute loss of consciousness, without any lay resuscitation,” reads the clinic’s report. The student suffers severe brain damage from lack of oxygen. To what extent have the teacher and present colleague is to blame for the fate of the boy and who is liable? The Federal court of justice (BGH) checks in on Thursday (from 10.00 am) at a six-year-old case from Wiesbaden. (Az. III ZR 35/18)
What exactly is it about in front of the BGH?
The former student public liability claims against the state of Hesse due to a lack of First-aid measures by the two teachers claimed. He calls at least EUR 500 000 for Pain and suffering, a good 100 000 Euro for the reimbursement of a material damage, a monthly more need a pension of about 3000 euros, as well as the finding of Hesse to pay for future costs.
The former high school student was injured in the incident, in January 2013, irreversible brain damage by lack of oxygen supply. He is disabled to 100 percent hard – because the teachers cardiac massage and artificial respiration would, claimed the plaintiff.
What have they done to the teacher?
The sports teacher, alerted by emergency call the emergency services. She brought the students to their statement in the stable side position. They had not ascertained, however, whether the student was still breathing. Her colleague felt only the pulse. Resuscitation measures, there were only paramedics and the ambulance.
As stated the lower courts?
Before the regional court of Wiesbaden, and later in front of the higher regional court (OLG) of Frankfurt, the plaintiff was unsuccessful: “It can not be found that any duty has injuries of the teaching staff in the framework of the assistance causally on the state of health of the plaintiff.” Only when the breathing is suspended already before the appearance of the rescuers, had to take the teachers resuscitation. The was not detectable. The appeal was rejected. Against this, the Revision is aimed in front of the Federal court of justice.
How is the legal situation?
For help in case of accidents everyone is obliged. In the case of failure to provide assistance the book (StGB § 323c) is threatening, according to the criminal law of up to a year in prison or a monetary penalty. Civil servant teachers are liable according to the German lawyer Association (DAV) in addition to § 839 BGB in conjunction with article 34 of the basic law, if you violate their official duty. Responsibility – public liability claim – takes over for you, but of the state. “Only in cases of intent or gross negligence on the part of the teacher can be taken recourse to,” says Thomas Summerer, Chairman of the Executive Committee of the DAV-Association of sports law.
What must a teacher do in an emergency?
According to the school laws of the countries they have a duty of supervision. The can – in the case of intermittent respiration of a student – resuscitation by cardiac massage and mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, says DAV-expert Summerer. “A teacher cannot rely on the ambulance.”
the Extent to which teachers are prepared to deal with emergencies?
Many part-time arrangements for First aid, says Udo Beckmann, the Federal head of the Association of education (VBE). Mandatory – as it has been since December 2013 for the sports teachers in the state of Hesse – this is, however, not everywhere. The GEW calls for a regular First-aid courses, the school paid for.
the Extent to which the case is of fundamental importance?
“At first glance, it is a sad case,” says sports lawyer Summerer. The Supreme court might say fundamental to the duties of action of a teacher.
How big is the Chance of Pain and suffering through the Land?
The plaintiff would need to prove a breach of duty by the teacher. The would occur if the breathing has been exposed to prior to the arrival of the physician. The Supreme court must therefore examine whether the court of appeal evaluated the evidence properly, and the burden of proof is properly distributed. Questionable could be if the higher regional court has taken into account the role of the second teacher enough.
there Are similar judgments?
The case is reminiscent of a tragic Happening in Höhr-grenzhausen (Rheinland-Pfalz): A twelve-year-old was caught in 2010 in a natural pool in the rope of a buoy. She was minutes under water and suffered irreparable brain damage. Instead of acting immediately, had the lifeguard initially a youthful look. In the case of a grossly negligent breach of Obligation, the burden of proof, the Supreme court decided to the end of 2017, and overturned a verdict by the Landgericht Koblenz (Az.: III ZR 60/16). The lower courts had similarly as in the current case, argued: It is not demonstrated whether the girl would not have been hindered at a faster rescue just as hard.