Comparative legal analysis reveals historically restrictive liability standards in school bullying cases, suggesting recent legislation may improve institutional accountability and victim protection.
School bullying constitutes a multifaceted phenomenon whose increasing prevalence and severity underscore the need for a systematic legal analysis of the questions of liability raised by its occurrence. Nevertheless, defining the scope and apportionment of liability among the minor offender, those responsible for the minor’s supervision, and public and private schools continues to raise significant interpretative and practical challenges. This article examines the current Greek legal framework and analyses the criminal and civil law dimensions of school bullying, with particular emphasis on the requirements for establishing the liability of the minor offender, the offender’s parents or other supervising persons, as well as public and private schools. Furthermore, through a comparative analysis of English and United States law, the article identifies the principal points of convergence and divergence in the criteria governing the attribution of liability. The analysis demonstrates that, to date, the judicial treatment of school bullying cases has remained particularly restrictive in recognising liability, with the result that the protective and preventive functions of the law have not always been realised to the extent desirable. In this respect, the provisions introduced by Law 5029/2023 lay the foundations for a clearer delineation of the relevant legal obligations, the development of a more coherent body of case law in relation to school bullying and, consequently, the enhancement of legal certainty and the effectiveness of the legal protection afforded.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Makrina Choidou (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: