The claimant complained of the negligence of the defendant council’s social worker’s in putting her four children into care. The Ombudsman had found the council guilty of maladministration and had awarded her andpound;5,000 for distress.
Held: The only difference in law between this case and JD -v- Berkshire was the coming into effect of the Human Rights Act. Article 8 required the authority to justify its interference in the claimant’s family life, but the coming into direct effect of human rights law did not undermine the public policy which gave primacy to the need to protect children. Though social workers had a continuing duty to act professionally and acknowledge all the interests at stake, but did not create a separate duty of care to te claimant in negligence.
Judges:
Auld LJ, Scott Baker LJ, Richards LJ
Citations:
Times 29-May-2007, [2007] EWCA Civ 446, [2007] 1 WLR 2991
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights 8
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – JD v East Berkshire Community Health NHS Trust and others HL 21-Apr-2005
Parents of children had falsely and negligently been accused of abusing their children. The children sought damages for negligence against the doctors or social workers who had made the statements supporting the actions taken. The House was asked if . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Human Rights, Children, Local Government, Negligence
Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.252320