Connor v Surrey County Council

Connor v Surrey County Council

The council, as employer, owed the claimant a duty of care to take reasonable steps to protect her psychiatric health. On the facts, the council breached that duty by failing to intervene in the dysfunctional governing body by February 2005 and by instituting an unnecessary inquiry into complaints against her, actions which were not precluded by public law obligations. These failures foreseeably caused the claimant’s psychiatric injury. The breaches were justiciable in private law negligence because the public law and private law duties marched together and there was no policy reason or statutory bar preventing the court from adjudicating liability.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Erica Joyce Connor; Defendant/appellant: Surrey County Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 March 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Employer's Duty of Care, Negligence, Justiciability of Public Law Functions, Psychiatric Injury at Work, Statutory Powers and Duties, Governance of Maintained Schools
Employment Law Tort Law Administrative Law Education Law Employer's Duty of Care Negligence Justiciability of Public Law Functions Psychiatric Injury at Work +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Erica Joyce Connor

Claimant/respondent

Surrey County Council

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the local authority breached its duty of care to the claimant by failing to intervene in school governance and by instituting an inquiry into complaints against her
  2. 2 Whether such failures are justiciable in private law negligence given the public law context and statutory discretions involved

Ratio Decidendi

The council, as employer, owed the claimant a duty of care to take reasonable steps to protect her psychiatric health. On the facts, the council breached that duty by failing to intervene in the dysfunctional governing body by February 2005 and by instituting an unnecessary inquiry into complaints against her, actions which were not precluded by public law obligations. These failures foreseeably caused the claimant’s psychiatric injury. The breaches were justiciable in private law negligence because the public law and private law duties marched together and there was no policy reason or statutory bar preventing the court from adjudicating liability.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal by Surrey County Council is dismissed.
  • The findings of negligence against the council are upheld.