header-logo header-logo

19 September 2014 / Richard Scorer
Issue: 7622 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

The Rotherham question

cover_rotherham

Where should the victims of the Rotherham abuse scandal seek compensation, asks Richard Scorer

Recent revelations about the sexual exploitation of 1,400 children in Rotherham have been truly shocking. But can the victims of these appalling crimes expect to receive compensation, and if so from whom?

Rotherham is one of several cases of child sexual exploitation to hit the headlines in the past two years. In all these cases the victims, typically girls aged 11 to 16, have been subjected to sexual exploitation by groups of men who use alcohol and drugs to lure them into abusive and violent relationships. Some of these men have now been convicted and further prosecutions are likely to follow. In many instances the victims have suffered extreme and potentially lifelong injury and damage, and as has been highlighted in media coverage, many currently lack any meaningful support to help with their ordeal. So it is unsurprising that many will look at the possibility of compensation.

Who to claim compensation from?

In theory, of course, the first target

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

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Employment law is shifting at the margins. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ this week, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School examines a Court of Appeal ruling confirming that volunteers are not a special legal species and may qualify as ‘workers’
Refusing ADR is risky—but not always fatal. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed and Sanjay Dave Singh of the University of Leicester analyse Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd: despite repeated invitations to mediate, the defendant stood firm, made a £100,000 Part 36 offer and was ultimately ‘wholly vindicated’ at trial
back-to-top-scroll