The question arising on the appeal in DJ v BARNSLEY MBC (2024) EWCA Civ 841 was whether a local authority can be vicariously liable for torts committed against a child by a foster carer who is also a relative of the child. This question was left open by the Supreme Court in ARMES v NOTTINGHAMSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL (2018) AC 355. The Court of appeal in the Barnsley case held that, on the specific facts of that case, the authority was liable. That was on the basis that the relationship between the authority and the carers was akin to employment. The Court of Appeal did not however lay down a general rule that a local authority will always be vicariously liable for torts committed by foster carers who are related to the child. Nor did they give any indication about the circumstances in which vicarious liability might arise under the present legislation and regulatory regime.
Subscribe
Get an email when we publish a new post on this blog. We’ll never share your email and you can unsubscribe any time. Our use of your details is explained in our privacy policy.
"*" indicates required fields
Headings
- Best Value (13)
- Capital Finance and Companies (55)
- Council Tax and Rates (75)
- Decision making and Contracts (266)
- Elections and Bylaws (33)
- Environment, Highways and Leisure (118)
- General (17)
- Housing (151)
- Human Rights and Public Sector Equality Duty (104)
- Judicial Control, Liability and Litigation (221)
- Land, Goods and Services (73)
- Local Authority Powers (74)
- Non Judicial Control (21)
- Planning and Environmental (156)
- Social Care (76)
- Standards (23)
Disclaimer
This blog is maintained for information purposes only. It is not intended to be a source of legal advice and must not be relied upon as such. Blog posts reflect the views and opinions of their individual authors, not of chambers as a whole.
Comments are closed.
11KBW, 11 King’s Bench Walk, Temple, London EC4Y 7EQ | Tel: 020 7632 8500
Privacy | Terms & Conditions | © 11KBW 2025
Privacy | Terms & Conditions | © 11KBW 2025