# data[].attributes.body
If Mr Toby had stayed and supervised the donkey he could have helped Lumi or prevented the case altogether.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr Toby is at fault although he did not physically harm Lumi himself, he did leave the donkey unsupervised to go eat something without finding another teacher to supervise the donkey.

# data[].attributes.body
Lumi suffered terrible injuries which included broken legs, broken arm, two fingers had to be amputated and she became blind in her one eye. In addition the aftermath of these injuries made Lumi suffer psychologically.

# data[].attributes.body
Mister Toby is to blame in this scenario. Each teacher is educated in the safety of learners can due to his actions of not thinking about his duties he risked learners' safety. He did not act professionally or reasonably. He should have informed another teacher or staff to swap for a while but he only thought about food and not the consequences or his responsibilities. Mister Toby is at fault and to blame for what happened to Lumi.

# data[].attributes.body
Mister Toby caused harm due to him neglecting his duties at the stall by not telling another teacher he was leaving his post because he was hungry. He did not think about the safety of other staff or learners and did not think about the harm that could happen if one of the donkeys came out. He was in the wrong and did act unlawfully.

# data[].attributes.body
There is a causal link between the injury that Lumi has suffered and the human conduct of Mister Toby. If mister Toby informed another teacher, they could have prevented the boy's firing firecrackers near the donkeys or tried to stop them before Lumi or someone got hurt. If mister Toby stayed at the stall he could have prevented the incident.

# data[].attributes.body
Mister Toby left the donkeys unattended because he was hungry. He did not inform any other staff that he wanted to get some food. A human conducted this act. Mister Toby did intend to hurt someone but did neglect his duty.

# data[].attributes.body
In this scenario, Lumi suffered the following damage he has severe injuries after the occurrence like two broken legs, one broken arm, crushed fingers that had to be amputated, blindness in one eye and a brain injury. This is the form of non-patrimonial loss/damage that will cause physical, mental, and emotional damage.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr Toby is the one at fault because he left the donkeys unattended. It was reasonably foreseeable that his conduct could cause damage because the learners were all over the place and there was noise and we know that animals can be easily scared because of the noise, although the act was not wilful, but he acted with negligence and this could have been prevented by asking another educator to be in charge of the donkeys.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr Toby is the one who is at fault because he left the donkeys unsupervised and before doing that he should have a colleague or someone older to look after the donkeys and also he should have considered peoples safety including learners before leaving animals alone because there was a lot going on and people caused noise that could have easily scared of the animals.

# data[].attributes.body
There was a breach of a legal duty namely the 'duty of care'. Mr Toby is obliged to always consider the learners' safety and well-being before doing anything.

# data[].attributes.body
There was a breach of legal duty because Mr Toby left the donkeys unsupervised, and it was his duty to look after the donkeys. in the end the donkeys severely injured Lumi.

# data[].attributes.body
There is a casual link between the damage caused and the act, because if Mr Toby had left another educator to be in charge of the donkeys while he was away the damage could have been prevented.

# data[].attributes.body
If Mr Toby had left the donkeys to be supervised by his colleague or someone who is older, then there is a possibility that Lumi was not going to get injured.

# data[].attributes.body
The damage is caused by a conduct of human, because Mr Toby left the donkeys unattended without asking another educator to be in charge while he is away. He did not act willfully because he was hungry and he went to look for something to eat.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes, Mr Toby is to be blamed because he left the donkeys unattended and they ended up injuring Lumi.

The teacher did not act out of free will because he was hungry and wanted something to eat and he did not think that living the donkeys alone would harm anyone. It was non-action.

# data[].attributes.body
Lumi sustained serious injuries which were 2 broken legs, one broken arm, crushed fingers on the right hand which had to be removed, he was blind in one eye, and he suffered brain damage.

# data[].attributes.body
Lumi suffered from the following severe injuries;

Two broken legs, one broken arm, crushed fingers which had to be removed, became blind in one eye due to small sharp rocks and he also suffered from a brain damage.

# data[].attributes.body
Dit was nie Lumi se skuld dat sy omgery was nie.Dit was weens Mnr Tobie se nalatigheid.Of dit kan ook wees dat hy nie die situasie deur 🤬 het nie.Indirek is die kinders wat die klappers gegooi het ook skuldig

# data[].attributes.body
So nee Lumi sou nie skade gelei het indien Mnr Tobie die donkies sonder toesig gelaat het nie.

Mnr Tobie moet verslag gee aan Lumi se ouers alhoewel die donkies rustig daar gestaan het maar dit eintlik die kinders was wat die klappers gegooi het -dit is indirek hulle skuld ook.Die kinders is jonk en sal lig daarvan af kom .Maar nie die Meneer nie.

# data[].attributes.body
Die handeling was direkte oorsaak van skade.Die skade sou nie voor gekom het indien Mnr Tobie anders opgetree het en maar eerder die donkies uit die area waar die was kinders verwyder het

# data[].attributes.body
Willekeurige menslike handeling -Mnr Tobie het nie daarnaan gedink om die donkies heeltemal uit die kinders se area te verwyder nie, aangesien hy gestap het om kos te gaan koop.Op daardie oomlik het hy net aan homself gedink en wou slegs sy behofte bevredig.Die skade was dus indirek veroorsaak deur die optrede van die mens.Dit was vir Mnr Tobie `n positiewe handeling want hy het vir hom gaan kos koop maar met verwysing na Lumi was dit `n negatiewe handeling

# data[].attributes.body
Lumi het seer gekry as gevolg van Mnr Tobie en die donkies.Daar was fisiese skade buite en binne haar liggaam. Met die verlies van drie vergruisde vingers.

# data[].attributes.body
Fault: Mr. Toby's negligence in leaving the donkeys unsupervised and the boys' reckless behavior in setting off firecrackers near the animals demonstrate fault or blameworthiness in contributing to the harm suffered by Lumi.

# data[].attributes.body
Link :Mr. Toby's decision to leave the donkeys unsupervised directly led to the incident where the donkeys ran over Lumi, causing her severe injuries. Additionally, the boys' actions of setting off firecrackers contributed to the donkeys becoming frightened and running uncontrollably

# data[].attributes.body
Causation: While Mr. Toby's actions may not have been intentionally malicious, they were negligent and breached his duty of care towards the students and the animals under his supervision. Similarly, the boys' actions of setting off firecrackers near the donkeys could be considered reckless or unlawful behavior.

# data[].attributes.body
Conduct: The incident occurred due to the negligent actions of Mr. Toby, the grade 5 teacher, who left the donkeys unsupervised and unattended while he went to search for food. Additionally, the group of boys who set off firecrackers near the donkeys contributed to the frightening situation that led to the donkeys running frantically and causing harm to Lumi.

# data[].attributes.body
Damage: Lumi, a grade 2 learner, suffered severe injuries, including two broken legs, a broken arm, crushed fingers, blindness in one eye, brain damage, and the possibility of never walking again. This constitutes significant physical and emotional harm, resulting in substantial damage and loss.

# data[].attributes.body
The act was conducted with fault as a result of negligence of the teacher who was guarding the learners. If factors such as noise and learners being unaware of the danger of the donkeys were considered then they would have put measures to ensure safety.

# data[].attributes.body
The act was unlawful, what was noticed was the fact that it was a breach of a legal duty of care. In terms of section 8A(2) of the South African Schools Act which puts emphasis on the schools responsibility to ensure the learning environment is safe and conducive. If ever damage occurs the teacher is held liable.

# data[].attributes.body
There is indeed a causal link between the act of the teacher and the damage that occur. If things were done differently harm would have been prevented.

# data[].attributes.body
The act that led to harm taking place was as a result of the teacher leaving the donkey without ensuring that they are in a safe environment. The act was conducted by the teacher who was negligent. It was a willful human act.

# data[].attributes.body
In the context of this scenario damage did occur. Lumi had two broken legs, one broken arm, a crushed finger and other physical disfigurement. Lumi suffered non-pecuniary loss. The damage is both physical and psychologically. This means that there will be loss of amneties of life and a reduced life expectancy.

# data[].attributes.body
The principal not doing his/her duty by searching learners' to ensure their safety and Mr Tobie also leaving the donkey stall without asking someone to take care of the donkeys while he went to get food. I believe they both breached their legal duties.

# data[].attributes.body
Lumi had terrible physical injuries which included two broken legs and one broken arm while two fingers were removed from the right hand and became blind in one eye.

# data[].attributes.body
There's a casual link between Lumi's injuries and the negligence of the Principal not doing his/her duty by searching learners' to ensure their safety and Mr Tobie's actions were also negligent because he shouldn't have left the donkey stall alone. He could have asked someone to take care of the donkeys while he went to get food

# data[].attributes.body
It was a duty of the principal to authorize a search to ensure learner’s safety. Therefore before the event started the principal could have asked the teachers to search every learner for harmful objects.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr Tobie's actions contributed to the incident, he shouldn't have left the donkey stall alone. He could have asked someone to take care of the donkeys while he went to get food.

# data[].attributes.body
It is possible to hold Mr. Toby, the grade 5 teacher in charge of overseeing the donkey cart rides, accountable for the donkeys' neglect while he went in search of food. A part of the incident was his failure to make sure the donkeys and people around them were safe.

# data[].attributes.body
It may be illegal or unlawful to set off firecrackers in a crowded public area, particularly when there are animals and children present. Because firecrackers have the potential to cause harm or disturbance, they are frequently subject to regulations and restrictions.

# data[].attributes.body
here is an obvious causal relationship between the injuries and property damage caused by the firecrackers being set off. Firecrackers made a lot of noise, and it scared the donkeys so much that they lost control, ran over Lumi, and wrecked their bicycle.

# data[].attributes.body
It may be forbidden or illegal to set off firecrackers in a crowded public area, particularly when children and animals are around. Because they can be harmful or disruptive, firecrackers are frequently governed by laws and regulations.

# data[].attributes.body
The scare that came from some boys nearby setting off firecrackers was the reason behind the incident where the donkey cart ran over Lumi. The boys' behavior in setting off the firecrackers could be regarded as deliberate even though it's not made clear whether it was reckless or intentional because it caused the donkeys to become scared and lose control.

# data[].attributes.body
The incident left Lumi, a learner in grade 2, with serious injuries. Lumi suffered from brain damage, blindness in one eye from small sharp rocks, two broken legs, one broken arm, and crushed fingers on the right hand. Lumi's bicycle was also totally destroyed under the donkey cart's wheel.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr. Toby is to blame. He did not act in a way a reasonable teacher would have acted. He left the donkeys unattended, a reasonable teacher knows that the donkeys, even though they're harnessed could come loose. A reasonable teacher would have not left the stall. Thus Mr. Toby is to blame for the injuries that Lumi suffered. He puts Lumi and other learners' lives at risk when he left the stall with donkeys unattended.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr. Toby created a source of danger when he left the stall without telling anyone he left, and leaving the stall and donkeys unattended. He should have thought about the safety of the learners if he leaves the stall unattended and one of the donkeys might come loose, but he did not. So Mr. Toby was in the wrong in this case.

# data[].attributes.body
There is a link between the injuries suffered by Lumi and Mr. Toby's acting negligent and leaving the stall with the donkeys unattended, even though they're harnessed. If Mr. Toby had not left the stall with the donkeys unattended, he could have tried to stop the running donkeys. He could have told another teacher that he wants to go and buy food then one of them could have stood in for him, but he did not inform anyone that he'll be leaving the stall.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr. Toby's acted negligent, he should not have left the stall with the donkeys unattended. He should have asked another teacher to stand in for him, or he could have asked a learner or a colleague to go and buy him some food. A human act led to Lumi getting hurt.

# data[].attributes.body
Lumi suffered physical damage, he has 2 broken legs, a broken arm, crushed fingers on his right hand, which they had to remove, and Lumi became blind in one eye. The damages Lumi suffered take the form of nin-patrimonial loss/damage. Lumi's parents can claim for compensation for pain and suffering and disfigurement.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr Toby decision to leave the donkeys unattended while they were still harnessed show negligence. A reasonable person in his position would have recognized the potential danger and taken steps to make less severe .

# data[].attributes.body
Mr Toby's conduct of leaving the donkeys unattended can be considered wrongful. As a teacher supervising the donkey cart he had a duty of care towards the safety of those involved including Lumi. Leaving the animals unattended in a situation where they could cause harm creates a wrongful act.

# data[].attributes.body
A causal link exists between Mr Toby's conduct and Lumi's injuries. If Mr Toby had properly supervised the donkeys, the firecrackers wouldn't have terrified them and Lumi wouldn't have been injured.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr Toby's actions contributed to the incident. He left the harnessed donkeys unattended while they had access to food.

# data[].attributes.body
Lumi suffered significant physical injuries including broken bones, crushed blindness in one eye, and brain damage.

# data[].attributes.body
The act was conducted with fault due to the negligence of the teacher on duty although it was not the intent of the teacher for harm to occur. The harm was reasonably forseeable, because Mr Tobi should've thought of external factors such as loud noises that would scare the donkey's as we grow up knowing that animals get frightened easily. This harm could've been prevented only if Mr Tobi decided to place the donkeys in a safe place where they would not cause harm.

# data[].attributes.body
The act was unlawful, because the teacher was in breach of a legal duty as he left the donkeys unattended. In terms of section 8A(2) of the South Africans Schools act emphasises that it is the schools responsibility to enforce measures that protects and ensures learners are safe during any school activity. This means that if any person is found to be liable then necessary steps should be taken. In terms of section 8A(1)(a)(b) of the Regulations for Safety Measures at Public Schools, The teachers and the school should ensure that learners are safe and protected, but Mr Tobi was negligent as well as the rest of the teachers, because they did not look after the learners or even ensure that the donkeys would not cause harm when left unattended.

# data[].attributes.body
In Lumi's scenario there is a causal link between the damage and the act. This means that if the teacher ensured that the donkeys are in a safe space where they will not cause harm then they wouldn't have ran over Lumi and the harm would have been prevented.

# data[].attributes.body
Firstly the act that lead to the harm was the teacher leaving the donkeys without ensuring that they are in a confined safe space that would not cause harm. The act was conducted by the teacher as it was the teacher who left the donkeys due to negligence. There was indeed a willful human act, because the damage was caused by human. If the teacher took precautionary measures before leaving the donkeys then Lumi's incident wouldn't have transpired. The teacher also acted out of free will as he took the decision to leave the donkeys unattended to go and grab something to eat.

# data[].attributes.body
In this scenario several damages did occur. Lumi had two broken legs, one broken arm, crushed fingers, was blind in one eye and the most severe damage was that Lumi also suffered brain damage and could not walk ever again. Lumi suffered non-pecuniary loss. Firstly the broken parts of his body indicates that there was damage to Lumi both physically and psychologically. Broken bones lead to pain and suffering and lastly due to brain damage it could mean shortened life expectancy as well as loss of amneties of life.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr Tobi did not intend for Lumi to get hurt, he was negligent so he is to be blamed for the damage on Lumi.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr Tobi did not intend for Lumi to get hurt but he was wrong for leaving the donkeys unattended, he should have known that they may run away when unattended

# data[].attributes.body
Lumi suffered severe injuries, two broken legs, one broken arm, crushed fingers and blind in one eye. He also suffered brain damage and he might not be able to walk again

# data[].attributes.body
Mr Toby left the donkey cart stall unattended and the donkeys ran over Lumi.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr. Toby's actions were negligent, but he did not intend for such events to occur, just that he did not take the safety measures to ensure the safety of the learners in the environment, leading him to breach the duty oaths.

# data[].attributes.body
It's an unlawful act from the teacher's side. According to the South African Schools Act 84 of 1996 8A (2) a public school must take measures to ensure the safety of learners during any school activities.

# data[].attributes.body
The incident that occurred was because of Mr. Toby's actions. If he had asked one of his colleagues for assistance in supervision or guarding the donkeys while he went out for a quick meal recap, the unforeseen events would have been prevented.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr. Toby simply left the donkey hawk in respect of getting something to eat because he was hungry. His negligence in failing to observe and harness the donkeys well or to ask someone to kindly observe them while he was out caused the donkeys to be frightened and led them to cause the havoc of a sudden accident, which caused Lumi's life to result in severe pain and disfiguration. Mr. Toby's conduct is deemed unprofessional as it violated his duties of ensuring a safe environment for every individual in the area.

# data[].attributes.body
Lumi experienced severe physical harms as he suffered 2 broken legs, fingers which had to be imputed out as they were in a bad shape, Lumi became blind due to the small rocks that got into his eyes. He also sustained brain damages which will impact him in future. The medical fees expenses for the incident are extremely high due to the seriousness of the matter. Lumis life is at stake and these injuries will affect his future and dreams.

# data[].attributes.headline
The teacher's actions were negligent, I do not think he intended for the incident to occur. He simply did not take measures to ensure the safety of learners, he breached his duty of care. It was reasonably foreseeable that the teacher's conduct could lead to harm.

# data[].attributes.subject
The teacher's actions were negligent, I do not think he intended for the incident to occur. He simply did not take measures to ensure the safety of learners, he breached his duty of care. It was reasonably foreseeable that the teacher's conduct could lead to harm.

# data[].attributes.headline
The actions of the teacher were unlawful, as he disregarded his responsibility of duty of care of learners and other statutory duty, and the actions of the teacher led to the rights of the learner to be implicated such as the right to human dignity s.10, and rights of children s.28(a) in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 108 of 1996

# data[].attributes.subject
The actions of the teacher were unlawful, as he disregarded his responsibility of duty of care of learners and other statutory duty, and the actions of the teacher led to the rights of the learner to be implicated such as the right to human dignity s.10, and rights of children s.28(a) in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 108 of 1996

# data[].attributes.headline
The damage caused was because of the actions of the teacher. If the teacher had asked someone else such as one of the other teachers to attend to the donkeys or even tied the donkeys up, this incident most likely would have been prevented.

# data[].attributes.subject
The damage caused was because of the actions of the teacher. If the teacher had asked someone else such as one of the other teachers to attend to the donkeys or even tied the donkeys up, this incident most likely would have been prevented.

# data[].attributes.headline
The teacher left the donkeys alone out of free will, he made a conscious decision to leave the donkeys unattended. This action led to the incident that occurred. 

# data[].attributes.subject
The teacher left the donkeys alone out of free will, he made a conscious decision to leave the donkeys unattended. This action led to the incident that occurred. 

# data[].attributes.headline
Lumi sustained severe injuries, his two legs broke and one arm, crushed fingers on his right hand which had to be removed, he is blind in his one eye, he has brain damage and Lumi might not be able to walk again. This incident led to to a financial burden to Lumi's parents as they have to settle medical costs and this incident impacts Lumi's future negatively and he might not be able to earn an income due to his injuries.

# data[].attributes.subject
Lumi sustained severe injuries, his two legs broke and one arm, crushed fingers on his right hand which had to be removed, he is blind in his one eye, he has brain damage and Lumi might not be able to walk again. This incident led to to a financial burden to Lumi's parents as they have to settle medical costs and this incident impacts Lumi's future negatively and he might not be able to earn an income due to his injuries.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr Toby was irresponsible and careless about the safety of the learners .A grade 2 learner was deadly injured beyond recognition. He failed to ask another teacher to monitor the Donkeys on his behalf because he could not focus anymore. According the South African Schools Act 84 of 1996.The school teachers must ensure that he learners are safe. Therefore Mr Toby is guilty of intent negligence.

# data[].attributes.body
The teacher did not intend for the harm to occur, but there was a form of negligence portrayed. Animals cannot be controlled so the possibility of the donkeys going off was a situation to take into consideration. The teacher could have thought about the possibility before leaving the learners alone. Since the harm was foreseeable, it could have been well prevented by asking other teachers to supervise the stall while the teacher went to get food. I think the teacher is guilty of negligence.

# data[].attributes.body
It was an unlawful act from the teacher's side. According to the South African Schools Act 84 of 1996 8A(2) a public school must take measures to ensure the safety of learners during any school activity.

# data[].attributes.body
If there had been safety measures in place, there would have been no accident. The teacher should have had other people there to help.

# data[].attributes.body
The teacher left the donkey alone because he was hungry. He may not have left the donkey alone if he was not sure that the donkey car was safe and secure. He could have asked other teachers to keep an eye on the donkey or he could have let the learners go with him. in this way he would have prevented the damage.

# data[].attributes.body
Lumi suffered physical harm as he suffered 2 broken legs, 2 fingers that needed to be removed and a broken arm. this would have created intense medical costs and will impact the way that he will be able to work in the future. Lumi became blind from the small rocks and also sustained brain damage, which will all impact the way he lives his life that he knows and will impact his future.

# data[].attributes.body
If Mr Toby had been present during the incident he could have done something to prevent this from becoming so big leading to one learned being harmed to the point of possibly losing his life

# data[].attributes.body
Mr Toby was negligent by leaving animals unattended in the presence of children who can be considered as minors

# data[].attributes.body
Why were there animals without the professionals hired to monitor them this shows that there was no proper planning for the stall, and rules had not been followed.

# data[].attributes.body
The damage was partly done by humans by mostly done by the chaos the animals, Firstly if there were rules placed for the bazaar kids would not have lightened the fireworks in the presence of the animals, and if Mr Toby had not left the stall unsupervised before finding a stand-in maybe this could have been prevented.

# data[].attributes.headline
39114244                                                                        LUMI IS FACED WITH NON-PECUNIARY LOSS BECAUSE HE WAS HARMED PHYSICALLY CAUSING DISFIRGUMENTS IN HIS BODY ONE BEING THE LOSS OF HIS FINGER WHICH WILL LEAVE HIM WITHOUT A FINGER AND THE BROKEN LEGS MAY AFFECT THE ABILITY TO WALK OR TO PERFORM SOME ACTIVITIES IN THE FUTURE  AND THE BRAIN DAMAGE MAY SHORTEN HIS LIFE EXPECTANCY OR MAY LEAD HIM TO HIS DEATH

# data[].attributes.subject
39114244                                                                        LUMI IS FACED WITH NON-PECUNIARY LOSS BECAUSE HE WAS HARMED PHYSICALLY CAUSING DISFIRGUMENTS IN HIS BODY ONE BEING THE LOSS OF HIS FINGER WHICH WILL LEAVE HIM WITHOUT A FINGER AND THE BROKEN LEGS MAY AFFECT THE ABILITY TO WALK OR TO PERFORM SOME ACTIVITIES IN THE FUTURE  AND THE BRAIN DAMAGE MAY SHORTEN HIS LIFE EXPECTANCY OR MAY LEAD HIM TO HIS DEATH

# data[].attributes.body
Mr. Toby was at fault for leaving the donkeys unattended, and the schools' fault for not having professionals present.

# data[].attributes.body
The action that took place was not of willful intent, though it could have been easily avoided. He could have asked someone to take his place before going to the stalls.

# data[].attributes.body
There is a causal link. Had Mr. Toby not moved away from the donkeys, he could have calmed the donkeys after the boys fired the crackers and Lumi could not have been injured.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr Toby's negligence in failing to properly supervise the animals and secure them to prevent them from running amok caused the donkeys to become frightened and run over Lumi, resulting in severe injuries. Therefore, Mr. Toby's conduct could be deemed wrongful and at fault, as it violated his duty to ensure the safety of the students and visitors at the bazaar.

# data[].attributes.body
The plaintiff must have suffered harm, which can include physical injury, emotional distress, or financial loss. In this case, Lumi suffered severe physical injuries, including broken bones, crushed fingers, blindness in one eye, and brain damage.

# data[].attributes.body
The harm suffered by the Lumi must have been caused by Mr. Toby's conduct. In this case, Mr. Toby's negligence in leaving the donkeys unattended was the legal cause of Lumi's injuries.

# data[].attributes.body
In this case, Mr. Toby's negligence in leaving the donkeys unattended could be considered a fault.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr. Toby's conduct of leaving the donkeys unattended and unsecured could be considered wrongful because he had a duty to ensure the safety of the students and visitors at the bazaar.

# data[].attributes.body
There are many faults in this scenario.
Mr Toby made the WRONG decision and was not doing what he was supposed to do. By him leaving the donkey cart, it gave chance to endangering the learners - which it did.
The school teachers and staff were also not paying attention when the group of boys decided to start trouble and set off the firecrackers which spooked the donkeys.

# data[].attributes.body
The act was most definitely unlawful.
According to the Regulations for Safety Measures at Public Schools, section 8A (1) (a) (b), Mr Toby and the rest of the teachers at the bazaar were negligent and did not look after the learners and violated the learners safety, by exhibiting unlawful acts.
First, Mr Toby did not take measures to ensure the safety of learners. Lumi was injured and sent to the hospital.
Second, the teachers were not supervising the group of boys who set off the firecrackers that frightened the donkeys.

# data[].attributes.body
In this scenario, there is a causal link.
If the act, which is the donkeys running frightfully from hearing the firecrackers, happened differently, the harm done on Lumi might not have occurred.
The act was not the direct cause of harm. One of the causes was the firecrackers that were let off by a group of boys and scared the donkeys which led to the donkeys trampling Lumi. Another cause could be Mr Toby leaving his post at the donkey cart, putting everyone at risk for in case something bad happens with the donkey cart.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr Toby, a teacher, did perform a willful act.
He left his donkey cart, even though he knew there were lots of young children running around. He made a clear decision to leave the donkey cart unattended. If Mr Toby was with his donkey cart and never left, he most likely could have stopped the donkeys from losing control and running off, thus preventing Lumi from getting hurt.

# data[].attributes.body
There was definitely harm and damage done. In forms of physical harm on Lumi who had many severe injuries such as two broken legs, one broken arm, crushed fingers on his right hand which had to be removed, blind in one eye and he suffered severe brain damage and doctors feared he will not walk again.
Another form is emotional harm. After Lumi went through so much physical harm and the recovery of his injuries, he most probably had emotional trauma.

# data[].attributes.body
Lumi suffered vast physical injuries. Lumi had two broken legs and a broken arm, as well as crushed fingers that had to be amputated. she lost her sight in one eye and also suffered brain damage. the doctors state that she may never walk again. there is also psychological trauma that must be considered if Lumi ever recovers.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr Toby acted willfully when he left the donkeys unattended, had he stayed at his post, Lumi would not have gotten hurt or the injuries would not have been as severe. He had control over his actions. the donkeys cannot be held accountable for acting on instinct as they do not have the luxury of freewill. the teachers actions facilitated the conduct of the donkeys.

# data[].attributes.body
Mr Toby's decision to leave the donkey's unattended was the driving force of the incident. The learners should not have been left unattended, a teacher or any other parent present was meant to supervise. the fireworks should not have been anywhere near where animals are. Mr Toby should have ensured that the donkey's were securely tied and gotten a colleague of his to guard his stall. Lumi's injuries are a direct result of the school and Mr Toby's negligence.