School bullying can cause concrete harm to a minor's health, peace of mind, and educational path. If your child suffers aggression, humiliation, exclusion, or online attacks, it is natural to wonder how to stop the conduct, what liability the school bears, and whether compensation can be obtained from the perpetrators' parents.
In this guide I want to help you distinguish the immediate protection of the minor from the subsequent claim for damages. I will explain when a behavior constitutes bullying or cyberbullying, why the school's liability is not automatic, and what elements are needed to prove the harm. The regulations are national; the reference to Milan concerns assistance for school-related events that occur or produce their effects here.
When conduct becomes bullying or cyberbullying
Bullying requires repeated conduct, not a simple occasional conflict between classmates. Article 1 of Law No. 71 of May 29, 2017, as amended by Law No. 70 of 2024, includes repeated aggression or harassment capable of causing anxiety, fear, isolation, or marginalization, also carried out through violence, pressure, threats, extortion, theft, property damage, insults, or mockery. The current text of Law No. 71 of 2017 also contains the distinct definition of cyberbullying.
A single episode may still be unlawful. If the repetition required by the legislative definition of bullying is missing, an act of violence, a threat, property damage, or a serious insult can still form the basis for civil protection and, when the elements are present, have criminal relevance. The label used by the school therefore does not decide whether compensable damage exists.
In cyberbullying, online dissemination matters regarding pressure, aggression, disparagement, extortion, identity theft, data manipulation, or content aimed at isolating or ridiculing the minor. A message originating in a private chat can take on a very different scope if it is forwarded, copied, modified, or published on a profile accessible to numerous users.
Who is liable for damage caused by a minor
The offender may be held personally liable if, at the time of the event, they possess the concrete capacity to understand the significance of their conduct and to determine it. This capacity, provided for by Article 2046 of the Civil Code, does not automatically coincide with a pre-established age and must be distinguished from criminal imputability. Thus, an offender who is not yet fourteen years old may also be involved in a civil assessment distinct from a criminal one.
Parents may be held liable pursuant to Article 2048 for the unlawful act of their unemancipated minor child who lives with them. Liability concerns educational and supervisory duties: it is not enough to claim unawareness of the conduct. Relevant factors include the child's age, personality, any prior warning signs, the rules imparted, and reasonably exigible control, including that over the use of digital devices and accounts.
Parental liability does not disappear at school. During school hours, physical supervision passes to the assigned personnel, but a behavior may also stem from an educational failure that precedes entry into the institution. Therefore, liability based on different grounds may concur for the same damage, without the presence of one necessarily excluding the other.
If the minor was incapable of understanding or intending, Article 2047 of the Civil Code shifts attention to the person required to supervise them, barring proof of having been unable to prevent the act. When it is not possible to obtain compensation from the supervisor, the judge may also award fair compensation, considering the economic conditions of the parties.
When the school may be liable
The school is not liable simply because the event occurs on the premises. It is necessary to link the damage to inadequate supervision, an organizational omission, or failure to activate due measures. The location and time of the episode, the pupils' age, the presence of staff, the predictability of the conduct, and prior reports all matter.
Previously known episodes change the assessment. Repeated communications from the family, requests for help from the minor, or prior aggressive behavior make a new event more predictable. In this case, it is not enough to describe the latest aggression; the school's responses, the measures adopted, and their actual implementation also become relevant.
Law No. 71 of 2017 requires institutions to adopt an internal code, establish a permanent monitoring committee, and incorporate prevention and contrast procedures into their regulations. The principal who becomes aware of the conduct must apply the procedures, promptly inform the parents, and promote educational initiatives. These obligations are described in articles 4 and following of the law on bullying and cyberbullying.
A sudden action may exclude liability when it proves truly unpredictable and unavoidable despite adequate supervision. However, the Court of Cassation has clarified that a sudden nature is not enough if elementary organizational measures necessary to maintain discipline are lacking. Age also has an impact: the supervision required for children is normally more intense than that exigible for students nearing the age of majority. The criterion is illustrated in the Civil Review of the Court of Cassation.
State schools and private schools
The party to whom the claim is addressed changes according to the nature of the institution. In state schools, Article 61 of Law No. 312 of 1980 provides for the administration to substitute the personnel in civil actions brought by third parties, without prejudice to recourse in cases established by law. For a private or paritaria school, the managing entity and the relationship with the assigned personnel must instead be correctly identified.
What damages can be compensated
Compensation is not an automatic sum linked to the word bullying. It is necessary to prove unlawful conduct, actual damage, and a causal link between the two. The severity of the facts is important, but it does not replace proof of the consequences suffered by the minor.
Non-patrimonial damage can have multiple components. An ascertainable psychophysical injury constitutes biological damage; inner suffering and concrete consequences on daily life can contribute to the overall assessment. The judge must avoid duplications, but may consider anxiety attacks, sleep disorders, isolation, abandonment of activities, relational difficulties, or a change of school made necessary by the events.
Documented expenses constitute patrimonial damage. Medical and psychological costs, pharmaceuticals, damaged goods, and other expenses made necessary by the affair may be relevant. However, an expense is not compensable simply because it was incurred during the same period: it must be reasonable and linked to the consequences of the unlawful behavior.
Proof can derive from multiple concordant elements. Health certifications, reports from professionals following the minor, absences, academic decline, communications with the institution, and testimonies help reconstruct the duration and intensity of the prejudice. A lower grade or a transfer, taken in isolation, do not alone demonstrate either the cause or the extent of the damage.
How to protect the minor and preserve evidence
Safety comes before compensation. If the conduct is ongoing, the school must be informed with a clear communication indicating facts, dates, locations, people present, and required measures. In the presence of immediate danger, serious threats, injuries, or the dissemination of particularly sensitive content, one must also contact the competent authorities without delay.
Digital evidence must be preserved before removal. Complete screenshots, profile addresses, links, dates, account names, original chats, and voice messages make it possible to understand the author, recipients, and dissemination. It is important not to modify the files and not to publicly reshare the offensive content, because a new share may aggravate the damage to the minor's privacy.
Online removal has a specific procedure. Article 2 of Law No. 71 of 2017 allows the minor over fourteen years of age, or the parent or person exercising parental responsibility, to request the blocking, removal, or anonymization of disseminated data. The provision mandates taking charge within twenty-four hours and intervention within forty-eight; failing this, or if the responsible party cannot be identified, the Italian Data Protection Authority may be involved.
The removal request does not replace compensation. It serves to limit the continuation of the damage, whereas the civil claim concerns consequences already produced. Similarly, a school disciplinary measure, an educational path, or any criminal proceedings have different purposes and do not automatically liquidate the damage suffered.
What path to consider and what errors to avoid
A school solution can quickly halt conduct when the institution recognizes the problem and adopts adequate measures: separation of risk situations, enhanced supervision, educational interventions, and support for the minor. Presidential Decree No. 134 of 2025 has also reinforced, within the student statute, the emergence of episodes and collaboration between schools and families.
The compensation claim requires a more complete framework. It can be addressed to the responsible parties and any insurance companies, indicating conduct, omissions, consequences, and available documentation. If a solution is not reached, the claim can be brought before the civil judge. Educational or conciliatory initiatives remain useful only if they do not expose the victim to pressure or victim-blaming once again.
Waiting for the problem to pass is a frequent mistake. Over time, messages may disappear, accounts may change, and reconstructing reports can become difficult. Deadlines for civil and criminal initiatives also depend on the nature of the facts and may have different starting dates: it is prudent not to postpone while relying on a vaguely remembered deadline.
For an initial framing, communications sent to the school, received responses, the school regulations, preserved digital evidence, and documentation of the consequences on the minor are normally useful. There is no need to accumulate irrelevant material: what counts is reconstructing in chronological order what happened, who was aware of it, and what changed after each report.
Frequently asked questions
Can I claim compensation for a single episode?
Yes, if the single event constitutes an unlawful act and has caused demonstrable damage. It may not fall under the legislative definition of bullying, which requires repetition, but an act of violence, a threat, property damage, or a serious insult can still generate civil liability.
Is the school always liable if the event occurs during lessons?
No, temporal location is not enough. One must consider supervision, organization, pupils' age, predictability, and prior reports. The school can exclude its liability if it proves the event was unpredictable and unavoidable despite adequate measures.
Do the author's parents bear liability even if they did not know about the messages?
Lack of awareness is not sufficient in itself. The assessment concerns the education imparted and the supervision exigible in relation to age, maturity, behavior, and use of technologies. Control must not nullify the child's autonomy, but must be concretely adequate to recognizable risks.
Does compensation include psychological damage?
Yes, when the prejudice is proven and causally linked to the conduct. Health documentation, symptom duration, and repercussions on life help distinguish a psychophysical injury or significant suffering from temporary distress that is not automatically compensable.
Must I wait for the conclusion of criminal proceedings?
Not necessarily. Civil protection, school disciplinary proceedings, and criminal proceedings have different purposes and rules. The choice of timing depends on the facts, available evidence, and the relationships between proceedings; in the meantime, it is important to protect the minor and preserve documentation.
Coordinated protection for the minor
Stopping conduct and compensating damage are distinct objectives. The first response must reduce risk, prevent further dissemination, and support the minor; the financial claim then requires identifying liability, consequences, and a causal link. For a case of school bullying or cyberbullying with effects in Milan, you can contact us to understand its correct legal framing.