The move by Crown Law to draft advice for school boards and their lawyers needing to act quickly in the face of potential legal action from parents is welcome.
However, the need for such a drastic step is a sad indictment on society.
between pupils/parents and teachers/boards of trustees, including two recent cases which ended up in the High Court where rulings were made against the schools.
Such disputes are often over matters such as conduct or appearance.
Both sides regularly argue the same thing: rights.
The rights of pupils to enjoy freedom of expression versus the rights of schools to establish and enforce rules.
In one controversial case, 16-year-old St John's College, Hastings, pupil Lucan Battison and his family went to the High Court after he was suspended for refusing to cut his hair.
His hairstyle was deemed by the school to be in breach of its rules.
The court ruled the suspension unlawful and the school's rule over hair length vague, and awarded costs.
In another case, two St Bede's College, Christchurch, pupils, then aged 16 and 17, were banned from competing in rowing's Maadi Cup after they breached airport security by riding a luggage carousel into a prohibited area.
Their parents took the case to the High Court, which granted an urgent injunction allowing the boys to row.
In a similar incident, 15-year-old Napier Girls' High School pupil Anela Pritchard made headlines taking to social media to post a speech that criticised teachers and the school system, and accused the school of suspending her.
There is no doubt a ''freedom of expression'' sound bite or heading makes an impact, and it is a cause dear to all hearts in a democracy. But many would argue these sorts of cases are blown out of proportion, and schools and parents should be able to - and for the most part can - resolve disputes among themselves.
Court action is undoubtedly an extreme measure: costly, time-consuming, upsetting for all involved, not to mention unsettling for other pupils.
Of increasing concern are the far-reaching implications of such court rulings, given the precedents set. Schools now reportedly feel vulnerable, unsure whether they can enforce their own regulations.
It is disturbing to learn one principal, Wellington College's Roger Moses, thinks parents are becoming more litigious, saying the incidence of them challenging decisions - particularly around extra-curricular activities - is becoming ''widespread''.
Parents should certainly take action if a school has been derelict in its duty to their children, in instances of abuse or misconduct, for example.
But are courts really the place to test regulations such as hair length or the authority of a principal to decide whether a pupil needs or deserves a period of time out?
There can be little doubt teachers face increasingly difficult tasks balancing teaching and discipline in an era where respect for authority is dwindling.
We want our youngsters to be independent free thinkers, to challenge themselves and test the limits, and we expect them to do that more as they reach young adulthood.
We task teachers with providing pupils a safe environment in which children can test themselves, and demand they provide children myriad opportunities to thrive inside and outside the classroom.
Many teachers go above and beyond any requirements to do so.
In return, surely it is right schools have certain requirements of parents and pupils - whether they be around health and safety, appearance or conduct.
For even in a democracy which values personal freedoms, there are rules which need to be respected and responsibilities that come with those rights.
Such rules should start in the home, progress through school, into the workplace and extend to the corridors of power.
It is hoped the new briefings will give schools more clarity, parents pause for thought, and the chance for the pendulum of rights versus responsibilities to settle on something of a happy medium.
The two are not mutually exclusive.
Perhaps that is something that needs to be better taught, learnt and understood by those on all sides of the equation.
