Armes v Nottinghamshire County Council [2017] UKSC 60

Facts

  • Natasha Armes alleged that she suffered physical and emotional abuse while in the care of placement parents appointed by Nottinghamshire County Council.
  • The placement parents were selected, appointed, and monitored by the local authority.
  • Armes claimed the local authority was vicariously liable for the placement parents’ actions, asserting they were acting under the council’s direction and control.
  • Nottinghamshire County Council argued that placement parents acted independently and were not under the council’s direct control.
  • The case was contested in lower courts, resulting in differing rulings regarding the applicability of vicarious liability to the council.
  • The dispute was ultimately decided by the Supreme Court.

Issues

  1. Whether the relationship between local authorities and placement parents is sufficiently akin to employment to justify the imposition of vicarious liability.
  2. Whether the policy considerations that inform vicarious liability support holding local authorities accountable for the acts of placement parents.
  3. Whether imposing vicarious liability on local authorities aligns with the objectives of protecting vulnerable children and ensuring accountability in placement-based care arrangements.

Decision

  • The Supreme Court held that although placement parents are not employees, the relationship between them and local authorities is sufficiently analogous to employment for the purposes of vicarious liability.
  • The Court emphasized the significant degree of control exercised by local authorities, including the selection, training, and oversight of placement parents.
  • Applying the five-stage test from Cox v Ministry of Justice [2016] UKSC 10, the Court found the public policy objective of child protection supported vicarious liability.
  • The Court ruled that local authorities can be held vicariously liable for abuse committed by placement parents during placement-based care.
  • The Supreme Court's decision resolved conflicting judgments from lower courts.

Legal Principles

  • Vicarious liability extends beyond traditional employer-employee relationships where another party exercises sufficient control, particularly in contexts involving the placement and oversight of caregivers.
  • The relationship between a local authority and placement parents, while not employment, can be sufficiently close to satisfy the tests for vicarious liability.
  • Public policy considerations, especially the protection of vulnerable individuals, are critical to the application of vicarious liability.
  • Entities best positioned to prevent harm and compensate victims should bear liability for abuse committed within their oversight.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court's judgment in Armes v Nottinghamshire County Council [2017] UKSC 60 established that local authorities may be vicariously liable for the wrongdoing of placement parents, thereby strengthening accountability and highlighting the importance of oversight in child welfare and placement-based care arrangements.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal