There is no requirement for children to be in the care of a local authority for the obligations under the Human Rights Act to arise, Court of Appeal rules.
The court considered the case of AB, a former looked after child, who claimed that Birmingham and Worcestershire councils failed to remove him from an abusive home environment.
The local authorities had argued in the High Court that the Human Rights Act could not be used to bring this claim as AB was not already in their care.
The High Court concluded that the treatment AB endured in the care of his mother and known to the authorities was not serious enough to have breached his human rights.
The Court of Appeal upheld this ruling, but clarified that there is no requirement for children to already be placed in the care of a local authority for the obligations under Article 3 of the Human Rights Act—the article covering freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment—to arise.
Anna Moore, partner at Leigh Day acting for AB in the appeal, said: ‘This case will have significance for many people like AB who, as children, should have been removed from abusive and neglectful environments, but the authorities responsible for their care did not step in to protect them.
‘The Court of Appeal has now unequivocally confirmed that the Human Rights Act can be used to bring claims in these circumstances. This means that others may seek redress when they have faced serious abuse and neglect and action was not taken to protect them.’
A spokesperson for Worcestershire County Council said: ‘We respect and acknowledge the ruling made by the Court of Appeal.’
Sign up here to recieve our free daily news and jobs bulletin.
