SKELETON ARGUMENT

These messages were from other students who were on the same course as her. Despite numerous complaints to the College authorities, the College took no action against these students. Helen Jones sought legal advice and was advised by her solicitors to bring a civil action in negligence against the College for their failure to take her complaints seriously.

Her legal claim was heard by Harshly J on January 2020. The relevant part of the judgement is as follows:

“The claimant, Miss Jones, has good cause to complain of her treatment by the College authorities. They should have responded to her complaints with some degree of sympathy, especially as there is clear medical evidence that these hateful messages caused Miss Jones significant psychological distress. However hateful these messages were, they were sent via a social media platform over which the College had no responsibility and control. In other words, the College had no duty of care towards Miss Jones for activities that were unconnected to their role towards her as a student. Accordingly, Miss Jones’s claim against the College is dismissed.”

Helen Jones now wishes to appeal against the decision and submits the following two grounds:
(a) The London Nautical Society College owes a duty of care towards its students;
(b) This duty of care arises with regard to any injury / damage caused by other students and it is immaterial that the messages which are the subject of complaint were communicated via a social media platform over which the College had no control.

Task

Prepare a detailed written skeleton argument on behalf of Miss Jones (on both grounds of appeal), the appellant in the Court of Appeal.

Pay attention to the examples / guidance on Moodle regarding format, etc.

Word limit: Maximum 1000 words

Maximum number of authorities: No more than six (this includes all primary as well as secondary authorities)