header-logo header-logo

17 November 2017 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 7770 / Categories: Features , Local government , Public
printer mail-detail

Not strictly liable?

Nicholas Dobson discusses the doctrine of vicarious liability & lessons from Armes

  • The Supreme Court has found a local authority that acted without negligence to be vicariously liable for child abuse perpetrated by foster parents in the 1980s under child care legislation in force at material times.

Ever wondered why vicars are called vicars? The reason is a vicar is someone who takes the place of another. And, ecclesiastically speaking, vicars are (per OED) ‘earthly representatives of God or Christ’.

English lawyers though, are likely to encounter the word in a rather less religious context. For vicar gives us: vicarious (taking or supplying the place of another thing or person). And when the doctrine of vicarious liability applies, the law will hold an innocent defendant liable for the torts (civil wrongs) committed by another.

In that connection, the Supreme Court has recently issued a landmark judgment on the liability of a local authority for physical, emotional and sexual abuse perpetrated against a child in its care whom the authority placed with foster parents during the

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll