DJ v Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council [2023] EWHC 1815 (KB) (18 July 2023)

DJ v Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council [2023] EWHC 1815 (KB) (18 July 2023)

The relationship between the G family and the local authority was not akin to employment; the Gs were engaged in the distinct activity of raising their nephew as family, not as agents of the local authority. The activity was sufficiently independent from the statutory obligations of the local authority to preclude vicarious liability.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 1815 (KB)
Parties
Appellant/claimant: DJ; Respondent/defendant: Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council; Part 20 Defendant: AG
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Against Order Dismissing Claim for Damages for Personal Injury (preliminary Issue: Vicarious Liability)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Vicarious Liability, Foster Care, Sexual Abuse, Local Authority Liability, Personal Injury

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DJ

Appellant/claimant

Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council

Respondent/defendant

AG

Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Against Order Dismissing Claim for Damages for Personal Injury (preliminary Issue: Vicarious Liability)

  1. 1 Whether the local authority is vicariously liable for tortious acts (sexual abuse) committed by a foster carer who is a relative of the claimant.

Ratio Decidendi

The relationship between the G family and the local authority was not akin to employment; the Gs were engaged in the distinct activity of raising their nephew as family, not as agents of the local authority. The activity was sufficiently independent from the statutory obligations of the local authority to preclude vicarious liability.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Order of Mr Recorder Myerson KC dismissing the claim is upheld
  • Anonymity orders for the claimant and Part 20 Defendant continue