header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
02 June 2011 / Heather Platt
Issue: 7468 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family , Personal injury , Limitation
printer mail-detail

Handle with kid gloves

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

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