CN v Poole Borough Council [2019] UKSC 25

Facts

• CN and GN, two children, suffered prolonged harassment and abuse from a neighbouring family.
• Their mother repeatedly sought assistance from Poole Borough Council’s social services department.
• Despite interventions, including police and housing authority involvement, the council did not rehouse the family.
• The children experienced significant psychological harm as a result of ongoing abuse.

Issues

1. Whether Poole Borough Council owed a duty of care to protect the children from harm caused by third parties.
2. Under what circumstances a local authority assumes responsibility for an individual's welfare, thereby creating a duty of care.
3. Whether providing services, even if negligently, automatically creates an actionable duty in negligence.
4. How statutory duties relating to housing and anti-social behaviour interact with common law duties of care.

Decision

• The Supreme Court held that Poole Borough Council did not create the source of danger; the harm was caused by neighbours.
• The council had not assumed responsibility for the children’s welfare sufficient to create the requisite proximity giving rise to a duty of care.
• Merely providing services, even if done negligently, was insufficient to constitute an assumption of responsibility for negligence claims.
• The Court overturned the Court of Appeal’s finding of liability and clarified the correct approach for establishing duty of care in similar cases.

Legal Principles

• A duty of care may arise if a public authority directly creates or increases a risk of harm to an individual.
• A local authority can assume responsibility and owe a duty of care where there is a relationship of proximity and the claimant relies on the authority’s protection.
• Statutory duties (such as those relating to housing or anti-social behaviour) do not automatically translate into common law duties of care.
• Provision of services alone, even if negligent, does not in itself demonstrate an assumption of responsibility.
• Policy considerations, including avoiding defensive practices and maintaining public services’ operational effectiveness, are relevant in limiting the scope of public authority liability.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court decision in CN v Poole Borough Council clarified that social services do not automatically assume a duty of care by providing services; an actionable duty arises only if the authority creates the risk or explicitly assumes responsibility, with courts to balance this against public policy concerns when evaluating negligence claims against public bodies.