header-logo header-logo

Handle with kid gloves

02 June 2011 / Heather Platt
Issue: 7468 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family , Personal injury , Limitation
printer mail-detail
gettyimages_112062879_4

Heather Platt examines the law in relation to children who sue their parents

IN BRIEF

  • The provisions of the Limitation Act 1980 lead to peculiar and unjust outcomes for claimants maltreated during their early years.
  • Claimants are advised to plead both negligence and trespass.

The law of tort is primarily concerned with providing a remedy to those who have been harmed by the conduct of others. This article considers the law in respect of parents’ legal obligations towards their children and some examples of cases which involve a child suing his or her parents for causing physical or psychological harm.

The case law in the UK has developed under the umbrellas of negligence and trespass to the person. However, one of the problems faced by claimants, particularly those who were abused as children, is the limitation regime which can operate in an arbitrary way causing irrational and unjust outcomes.

The limitation hurdle

The statutory basis for the limitation is the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980). It provides

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll