George Galloway reveals he was victim of child sex abuse
20th July 2009
George Galloway MP revealed in the Daily Record that he had been abused by a school janitor at the age of 11.
Abuse by employees of a school or a local authority may give rise to a compensation claim. In the case of LISTER AND OTHERS V HESLEY HALL LIMITED [2001] UKHL 22 a school was held vicariously liable for abuse committed by the warden of a children’s home. It was held that if the employee’s abusive actions were closely enough connected with his employment, it may be fair and just to hold the employer vicariously liable.
There is then the case the Court of Appeal of A versus Ioworth Hoare, H versus Suffolk County Council and the Secretary Of State Of Constitutional Affairs, X & Y versus London Borough Of Wandsworth [2006] EWCA Civ 395.
The Court of Appeal was again bound by authority to find that the Defendant’s vicarious liability for sexual assaults was subject to a non-extendable six year limitation period.
However the Court of Appeal was bound by the decision in Bryn Alyn to reject the contention that the school could be vicariously liable for the teacher’s failure to report what he was doing, or was about to do to the boys. All that was left was the contention that that those elements of the teacher’s breach of duty that did not constitute intentional assaults or failure to report what he was doing were sufficient. It would be tempting to allow the appeal on this basis, and remit them back to the court below for assessment, but it would be better to grant permission to appeal to the House of Lords to consider whether it can rescue the law from its incoherent state.
The judge in the court below had rejected the contention that the Defendant should be vicariously liable for his misconduct because the sexual acts themselves took place off the school premises. The Court of Appeal said that this was not sufficient to dismiss an allegation of vicarious liability, and that vicarious liability would lie in this case. The question that had to be asked, was, could the teacher’s actions towards Y be fairly regarded as being performed in the course of his employment by the school? The facts in this case were quite different from the acts of a school grounds man or the acts of a teacher in the school holidays which had no connection with his responsibilities at the school.
See Daily Record 20 July 2009 Exclusive: I was sexually abused as a child, reveals George Galloway
