Yes. The law states that anyone exercising parental authority, usually the mother and the father, can be held liable for damages caused by their minor child. This liability derives from the parents’ obligation to supervise and educate their children.

If a minor commits a fault or acts in a way that causes injury to another person, an animal or to the property of another, the law assumes that the parents are at fault. The law presumes that the damage would never have happened if the child had been well-supervised or educated properly.

But watch out! A parent’s responsibility is not absolute. Parents can free themselves of liability by proving that they have committed no fault in the custody, education or supervision of the child.

Once a parent realises that her child has caused damage to someone else (or, a bit later, after getting the situation under control!), she should notify her insurer.

Bodily damage (to people) and material damage (to property) caused by a child are generally covered by the parents’ home insurance. Once notified, the insurer can manage any claims or eventual lawsuits undertaken by the person who suffered the damage or by that person’s insurer.

It is also important to remember that, for different reasons related to the nature of an insurance contract, insurance companies can refuse to cover an incident if they are not promptly informed about it.

To free yourself of liability, you must show that your behaviour didn’t lead to the injury.

To do so, you must prove that you have committed no fault in the supervision or education of your child. Depending on the situation, the court will consider the following:

1) Supervision:

• Were you able to prevent the injurious act at the time it occurred?
  
• Was the system of supervision used by the family adequate given the circumstances? Was it adapted to the child’s age? Did it take into account the child’s behaviour and temperament?

2) Good education:

• What values and principles were impressed upon the child?
• What type of behaviour does the family forbid, permit, and tolerate?
  
• What type of example do the parents show?
  
• What rules of safety do the parents impose concerning dangerous games or activities?

Also, in terms of proving their child’s good education, parents can enter proof of the child’s school results, extracurricular activities, and the opinions of people from the neighbourhood who know the child.

Yes. You can sue both the minor and his parents.

But a minor child can only be held responsible for damages caused to another person if at the time of the incident the child was endowed with reason, i.e. capable of determining right from wrong. The courts have ruled that a child acquires such capacity around 7 years old. The courts must evaluate each case individually.

Not always. The courts attach considerable weight to a parent’s ability to anticipate their child’s acts.

In the past, the courts were harsh on parents who closed their eyes to their child’s bad behaviour when they should have issued sterner warnings and taken further precautions.

For example, the courts have blamed parents who:

• left cigarette lighters or firearms accessible to the child even when they were fully aware that their child disobeyed orders to keep away from such objects;
  
• failed to act when told their child was using a rifle dangerously;
  
• tolerated the use of a rifle by their children to shoot at tin cans hanging from their basement ceiling;
  
• did nothing to deter their child’s habit of throwing stones.

A stern warning may or may not suffice depending on the child’s temperament and the degree to which he obeys his parents.

Divorce or the dissolution of a civil union does not alter a parent’s relationship to his children. Each parent maintains parental authority and as such can be held liable for the fault or injurious act committed by their child.

You can be held liable for any damages caused by your child if he has not attained full age, even if he no longer lives with you.