header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
20 September 2024 / Christopher Ratcliffe
Issue: 8086 / Categories: Features , Family , Child law
printer mail-detail

Fostering & family ties

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
189727
Are local authorities liable for abuse within foster placements, regardless of the child’s relationship to the foster parents? Christopher Ratcliffe traces recent case law
  • The Court of Appeal has held that the relationship between foster parents and a local authority could be akin to employment to satisfy the requirements for vicarious liability, even where the foster parents and foster child were related. However, the court refused to lay down a blanket rule.
  • This article considers the reasoning behind that decision, the implications for future cases and why the Court of Appeal was right to discount any motive on the part of the foster parents for fostering children into the equation.

Vicarious liability is a rule of responsibility which assigns liability to one party for torts (civil wrongs) committed by another. The responsible party may be blameless, and while the tortfeasor remains liable, the injured party may choose to pursue the responsible party for redress for several reasons, including that they may be in a better position to satisfy any award of damages.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll