N v Poole Borough Council
A local authority did not owe a duty of care to protect children from harassment by neighbours merely because it had statutory powers to protect children, but it could owe a duty if it assumed responsibility.
Facts
A mother and her two children, one of whom had severe disabilities, were placed by the council in a house on an estate next to a family who subjected them to years of harassment and abuse. The children claimed that the council had been negligent in failing to investigate and protect them, using its powers under the Children Act 1989, such as by taking them into care or rehousing them.
Legal principle
The Supreme Court held that the council owed no duty of care. Lord Reed said that public authorities are generally subject to the same principles as private individuals, so they are not generally under a duty to protect people from harm caused by third parties, unless there is an assumption of responsibility or another recognised exception. The council had not assumed responsibility for the children's welfare by investigating and monitoring their situation, because it had not taken them into care or otherwise taken control of their lives. The case clarified the law after X v Bedfordshire County Council and D v East Berkshire Community Health NHS Trust.
Related cases on duty of care
- Anns v Merton London Borough Council [1978] AC 728
- Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605
- Capital & Counties plc v Hampshire County Council [1997] QB 1004
- Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust [2018] UKSC 50, [2019] AC 831
- Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562
- Gorringe v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council [2004] UKHL 15, [2004] 1 WLR 1057
- Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [1989] AC 53
- Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd [1970] AC 1004
Studying tort law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
