UAE court upholds conviction over child’s pool drowning

The UAE Federal Supreme Court has upheld the conviction of a supervisor who left children at a sports club swimming pool before the coach took charge, Gulf News reported. A child who could not swim drowned during the trip. The court said the supervisor’s negligence caused the death.

Why did the UAE court uphold the conviction?

The court ruled that the supervisor breached his duty of care. Responsibility for children does not end when they arrive at a facility. It continues until the coach knows they are present and actually begins supervising them. The supervisor also had to tell the coach the child could not swim.

What happened at the swimming pool?

The supervisor took a group of children from a Quran memorisation centre to a pool at a sports club. After arriving, he left them before the swimming coach had begun his duties. One child entered the pool during that time.

It was the child’s first visit to a pool, and the child could not swim. The child drowned.

The Public Prosecution referred two people to trial: the person responsible for supervision at the pool and the supervisor who accompanied the children. Prosecutors said both failed to fulfil their duties and to take the necessary precautions. The court found both had left the children without the effective supervision needed to prevent the death.

The Court of First Instance convicted both men. It fined each Dh1,000 and ordered them to pay blood money (diya) jointly. The Court of Appeal upheld the judgment.

What did the supervisor argue in his appeal?

The supervisor challenged his conviction before the Federal Supreme Court. He argued that his role was limited to escorting the children to the club and that his responsibility ended on arrival. He said supervision inside the facility fell to club staff and the coach.

The court rejected this argument. It ruled that children arriving at a venue does not automatically shift responsibility from the accompanying adult to the facility’s employees. The supervisor should have stayed with the children until the coach directly received them and began supervising.

What counts as a proper handover of children?

The court said leaving children at a facility on the assumption that someone else will take over is not enough. A proper handover has three requirements. The person taking over must know the children are present, understand any circumstances relevant to their safety, and begin supervising in practice.

The court said the supervisor’s responsibility went beyond transporting the children. He had to ensure continuity of care and prevent any gap in supervision.

Why did the child’s lack of swimming experience matter?

The court said the circumstances required particular care because the child had never been in a swimming pool and could not swim. The supervisor was required to tell the coach about the child’s lack of swimming ability. That would have allowed proper precautions before the child was allowed near or into the pool.

The court added that a person entrusted with a child’s care remains responsible for as long as the child is under their supervision. That responsibility does not end because the child has been brought to a facility or a location designated for an activity.

What does the lawyer say about the ruling?

Legal consultant and lawyer Mohammed Ali Al Hammadi said the ruling shows the importance of continuous supervision of children. He said responsibility must be properly transferred before an accompanying adult leaves. Taking children to a facility does not, in itself, relieve the adult of their duty of care.

Al Hammadi said the handover must be direct and actual. The person receiving the children must be aware of their presence and ready to take responsibility for their safety. Adults supervising children must also share relevant information about their abilities, needs and lack of experience with an activity, especially when it affects the level of care required.

He said the ruling is particularly relevant to group outings organized by Quran memorisation centres and other institutions. Responsibility in such cases may pass between accompanying supervisors and staff at the destination.

He also said even a brief interruption in supervision can have fatal consequences. Where negligence and its link to the harm are established, failing to maintain proper care may lead to criminal liability.