W L-6 v Essex County Council & Anor [1998] EWCA Civ 614 (2 April 1998)

W L-6 v Essex County Council & Anor [1998] EWCA Civ 614 (2 April 1998)

The claims in negligence, negligent misstatement, contract, and misfeasance in public office against the local authority and its social worker were struck out because the acts complained of were performed in the course of statutory child welfare functions, to which public policy and precedent preclude the imposition of a common law duty of care or contractual liability. The parents' claim for psychiatric injury failed as they were secondary victims and did not meet the legal criteria for recovery.

Citation
[1998] EWCA Civ 614
Parties
Appellant (plaintiffs): W L-6 (parents and children); Respondent (first Defendant): Essex County Council; Respondent (second Defendant): Anthony Golden
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 April 1998
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) to Court of Appeal (civil Division) on Strike Out Application
Outcome
Plaintiffs' appeal dismissed; defendants' cross-appeal allowed; Amended Statement of Claim struck out.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Vicarious Liability, Negligent Misstatement, Misfeasance in Public Office, Psychiatric Injury, Duty of Care, Foster Care, Statutory Duties, Privity of Contract
Tort Law Contract Law Public Law Child Welfare Law Negligence Vicarious Liability Negligent Misstatement Misfeasance in Public Office +5 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 5 Authorities cited 27 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W L-6 (parents and children)

Appellant (plaintiffs)

Essex County Council

Respondent (first Defendant)

Anthony Golden

Respondent (second Defendant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) to Court of Appeal (civil Division) on Strike Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a local authority and its social worker owe a duty of care in tort to foster parents and their children regarding information about foster placements
  2. 2 Whether negligent misstatement or misfeasance in public office claims can be sustained against the local authority or its social worker in this context
  3. 3 Whether there is a contractual relationship between foster parents and the local authority giving rise to enforceable terms

Ratio Decidendi

The claims in negligence, negligent misstatement, contract, and misfeasance in public office against the local authority and its social worker were struck out because the acts complained of were performed in the course of statutory child welfare functions, to which public policy and precedent preclude the imposition of a common law duty of care or contractual liability. The parents' claim for psychiatric injury failed as they were secondary victims and did not meet the legal criteria for recovery.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' appeal dismissed; defendants' cross-appeal allowed; Amended Statement of Claim struck out.

Orders

  • All claims in negligence, negligent misstatement, contract, and misfeasance in public office struck out.
  • No damages recoverable for psychiatric injury by parents as secondary victims.