Local Authorities Vicariously Liable For Foster Carer Abuse

Armes (Appellant) v Nottinghamshire County Council (Respondent) [2017] UKSC 60

In this highly anticipated case, which has important implications for local authorities and their insurers, the Supreme Court has held the Defendant local authority vicariously liable for the abuse committed by the foster parents, but rejected the argument that the local authority was liable on the basis of a non-delegable duty.

In this judgment the Supreme Court has continued to widen the scope of vicarious liability. Local authorities and their insurers can now expect to receive numerous claims for historical abuse in this context.

The Facts

The Claimant was in the care of the local authority between the age of 7 and 18. She was placed in the foster care of Mr and Mrs A between 25 March 1985 and 27 March 1986, and with Mr and Mrs B between 23 October 1987 and 23 February 1988.

The Claimant brought a claim arguing the local authority were liable in respect of the physical abuse the Claimant sustained from Mrs A and the sexual abuse from Mr B.

At first instance

The Defendant won at first instance. The Judge found that the Claimant had been physically abused by her foster parents. However, evidence was accepted from the Defendant's social care expert that there was no negligence on the part of the social workers involved.

The Court found that a local authority could not be vicariously liable for the deliberate acts of foster parents, and a local authority does not owe a child in foster care a non-delegable duty. The Claimant appealed against these two findings.

Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal held that a local authority, which had not been negligent in placing a child in foster care, or in supervising the placement, could not be vicariously liable for abuse perpetrated by the foster carers. Additionally it was found that it was not fair, just or reasonable to find that the local authority had a non-delegable duty of care so as to make it legally responsible for the foster carers' actions.

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal by a majority of 4-1 finding it is fair, just and reasonable to extend the doctrine of vicarious liability, on the part of a local authority, to cover the acts of foster parents towards a foster child, even in the absence of any fault on the local authority's part.

However the Court rejected the argument that the local authority was liable on the basis of a non-delegable duty. Lord Reed gave the lead judgment, with which Lady...