Defenses of teachers vicarious liability:

1. Where the injury suffered by a student under the schools custody was
committed by one who was an outsider or by one over whom the school did
not exercises any custody or control or supervision. PSBA v. CA, G.R. No.
84698
2. That the teachers negligence was not the proximate cause of the damage or
injury. (St. marys Academy vs. capistranos, 376 SCRA 473)
3. When the injury suffered is an exercise of self-defense, defense of others and
defense of property. To invoke any of these defenses, the teacher must act
during the incident and exercise a reasonable degree of force under the
circumstances.
4. Assumption of risk which means that the student understood the inherent
dangers of a situation and assumed the risk of engaging in an activity (ex.
Engaging into sports)
5. Contributory negligence, by contrast, involves a scenario where the victims
own actions contributed to the harm suffered.
6. Article 219 p (2) of the Family Code states, liabilities shall not apply if it is
proved that they exercised the proper diligence required under the particular
circumstances.
7. In Amadora, et al. vs Court Of Appeals, et al. the Supreme Court held that as
regards the term teachers or heads of establishments of arts and trades,
teachers in general shall be liable for the acts of their students except where
the school is technical in nature, in which case it is the head thereof who shall
be answerable. Teachers can raise the defense that the school is not an
institute of arts and trades as provided by law.