## Facts

- Booth was the headmaster of a school and had disciplinary authority over two boy pupils.
- Booth learned the boys had fought while on their way to school, before reaching school premises.
- After the boys arrived at school, Booth administered corporal punishment for the fight.
- The prosecution did not center on the severity of the punishment; the dispute focused on whether Booth had authority to punish conduct occurring off school grounds and outside school time.
- Booth was criminally charged with assault and battery based on the corporal punishment.

## Issues

1. Whether a schoolmaster’s common-law privilege to administer reasonable chastisement extends to punishing pupils for misconduct occurring off school premises and outside formal school hours when the misconduct is connected to school attendance.
2. Whether moderate corporal punishment imposed under such authority constitutes criminal assault and battery.

## Decision

- The Queen’s Bench Division allowed Booth’s appeal and set aside the conviction.
- The court rejected the trial judge’s view that a schoolmaster’s authority is confined to misconduct occurring on school premises.
- The court held that a schoolmaster may administer reasonable corporal punishment for misconduct connected with the school relationship, including misconduct occurring on the way to school.
- Because the punishment was treated as moderate and not excessive, it fell within the schoolmaster’s lawful authority and did not constitute assault and battery.

## Legal Principles

- A schoolmaster stands in loco parentis and has a common-law privilege to use moderate and reasonable corporal punishment for discipline and correction.
- The scope of a schoolmaster’s disciplinary authority is not limited strictly by the physical boundary of school premises; it may reach pupil misconduct closely connected to school attendance (such as conduct en route to school).
- The existence of authority to punish a category of misconduct is distinct from the question whether the force used was reasonable; excessive or cruel punishment remains unlawful even where authority exists.
- Corporal punishment imposed bona fide for discipline and within reasonable limits is privileged and is not criminal assault.

## Conclusion

The court reversed Booth’s assault conviction, holding that a schoolmaster’s privilege of reasonable chastisement can extend to off-premises misconduct closely tied to school attendance, and that moderate discipline imposed on that basis is not criminal assault.


Cleary v. Booth, [1893] 1 Q.B. 465 (Q.B.D.)