Nicholas Dobson discusses the doctrine of vicarious liability & lessons from Armes
- The Supreme Court has found a local authority that acted without negligence to be vicariously liable for child abuse perpetrated by foster parents in the 1980s under child care legislation in force at material times.
Ever wondered why vicars are called vicars? The reason is a vicar is someone who takes the place of another. And, ecclesiastically speaking, vicars are (per OED) ‘earthly representatives of God or Christ’.
English lawyers though, are likely to encounter the word in a rather less religious context. For vicar gives us: vicarious (taking or supplying the place of another thing or person). And when the doctrine of vicarious liability applies, the law will hold an innocent defendant liable for the torts (civil wrongs) committed by another.
In that connection, the Supreme Court has recently issued a landmark judgment on the liability of a local authority for physical, emotional and sexual abuse perpetrated against a child in its care whom the authority placed with foster parents during the 1980s. The Court decided by a 4-1 majority that
