Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
One in four family lawyers contemplates leaving the profession, Resolution reveals
A quarter of family justice professionals are on the verge of quitting the profession as the toll of lockdown on their mental health becomes clear, the family law group Resolution revealed today,...
Family Law Awards adds a Wellbeing Award - enter now
This past year has been different for everyone, but family law professionals working on the front line of family justice have faced a more challenging, stressful and demanding time than most. To...
Pension sharing orders: Finch v Baker
The Court of Appeal judgment in Finch v Baker [2021] EWCA Civ 72 was released on 28 January 2021. The judgment provides some useful guidance on not being able to get what are essentially...
Eight things you need to know: Personal Injury damages in divorce cases
The “pre-acquired” or “non-matrimonial” argument is one which has taken up much commentary in family law circles over recent years.  However, the conundrum can be even...
Misogyny as a hate crime – what it means and why it’s needed
In recent weeks, the government announced that it will instruct all police forces across the UK to start recording crimes motivated by sex or gender on an experimental basis- effectively making...
View all articles
Authors

LOCAL AUTHORITY/NEGLIGENCE: Lawrence v Pembrokeshire County Council [2007] EWCA Civ 446

Sep 29, 2018, 17:15 PM
Slug : lawrence-v-pembrokeshire-county-council-2007-ewca-civ-446
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : May 22, 2007, 04:22 AM
Article ID : 87607

(Court of Appeal; Auld, Scott Baker and Richards LJJ; 15 May 2007)

A local authority did not owe a duty of care to a parent of a child when exercising, through its social workers, its duties to protect children from their parents, in this instance by placing them on the Child Protection Register as being at risk; the common law was, in this respect, unchanged by the introduction of the right to respect for family life under Art 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 (the Convention). Art 8 did not undermine or weaken the primacy of the need to protect children from abuse or the risk of abuse from, among others, their parents. The common law protected from malice or bad faith, but not from a well-intentioned but negligent mistake; the provision of a discrete Convention remedy did not necessitate a change of the common law.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from