Foster Care Abuse Survivors to Sue Local Authorities

Overturning two previous judgments, the UK Supreme Court delivered a landmark ruling, in 2017, which opens the door for people who were abused by their foster carers to hold the Local Authority to account.

Our Abuse Solicitors at Simpson Millar welcomed the decision and believe we will see an increase in cases brought from foster home abuse survivors in the wake of this judgment.

The Case of Armes v Nottinghamshire County Council

This case concerned a child who was placed in foster care from the age of 7 until the age of 18 years old. Their first foster care experience was with a couple known as Mr and Mrs A which took place between 25 March 1985 and March 1986. Later, the child was placed in foster care with Mr and Mrs B between 23 October 1987 and 28 February 1988.

In the first instance, the appellant (someone who appeals to a higher court) was physically abused by Mrs A and unfortunately later then sexually abused by Mr B. Nottinghamshire County Council denied liability (responsibility) for the crimes perpetrated by the two foster carers, despite the fact that it happened under their watch.

The case was heard by the Supreme Court in 2017 after the case was previously dismissed by both the High Court and the Court of Appeal back in 2015. Ultimately, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal by a majority of 4-1 and found that the local authority was responsible for the abuse committed by the foster parents involved. The court found that the local authority was responsible through a principle called ‘vicarious liability’.

Vicarious liability means that an employer is responsible for the actions of an employee if it was done in the course of their employment. Courts often test this principle. Recently, the Supreme Court decided that a local authority is responsible for foster carers. This is because the authority recruits, trains, and supervises foster parents, pays their expenses, and places children with them. The court recognized that this creates a relationship where children are vulnerable to abuse, and the local authority is essentially in charge.

The reasons for this include considerations such as the fact that the local authority carried out the recruitment, selection and training of foster parents. They also paid for their expenses and supervised the fostering. In addition to this, the placement of children with foster parents created a relationship of authority and trust between the foster parents and children which the court acknowledged resulted in the children being particularly vulnerable to abuse, essentially under the direction of the local authority.

Because the local authority had a lot of control over foster parents, the court decided it's fair to hold them responsible for what the foster parents do. The authority had the power to approve, check, supervise, and remove foster parents.

Additional consideration was given to the fact that most individual foster parents would not have sufficient funds to meet a substantial award of compensation to the survivors of their abuse. In these instances, the survivor is negatively impacted through no fault of their own and should therefore have a legal recourse against the local authority who placed them in a position where they were vulnerable to, and subsequently experienced, abuse.

One of our Abuse Law Solicitors called the decision ‘long overdue’ and said:

“This ground breaking decision finally imposes a legal liability on Local Authorities for acts of abuse committed by foster parents. This is long overdue and a welcome extension of the law to protect vulnerable children.”