“It goes to show how meaningless the awards that have been heaped on Camden are" (quote by Camden Council Leader Cllr Keith Moffitt)


There are 134 or so posts on this blog - if you only see one post and no side links please click HERE to take you to the main blog

The Alternative Media Outlet for News and Views

This blog informs the reader of what tradional media outlets such as local newspapers daren't inform. It also allows the reader to make comments about and discuss the news and views displayed on this site.

It allows free speech and deals with issues that for some are uncomfortable reading. Its primary aim is hold our local representatives to account and to expose bad practices and crime within Camden Council - for the good of all decent inhabitants of the borough who have a vested interest in what their council gets up to.



17.3.09

Child abuse in Camden Council childrens 'homes'?

NB Because of a request made to me via the commentabout@yahoo.co.uk email address, I have deleted most of the report.

http://www.mjsol.co.uk/resources/library/cases/child-abuse/london-borough-camden-2002/


A V THE LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN

25th October 2002
High Court of Justice, Queens Division


FACTS:-

The Claimant was born on the 18th July 1965. She was taken into care by the Defendant in January 1968 and returned to her mother in 1974. In 1977 her mother was committed to hospital and so she was again taken into care. Between the years of 1971 to 1975 and 1977 to 1982 she suffered physical and sexual abuse at two children’s homes for which the Defendant was responsible.

She brought an action against the Defendant. Her particulars of claim were served on the 9th July 2001 and an order was made on the 24th September 2002 for a split trial on the issue of limitation. The only issue to be tried at that hearing was under section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980. It was admitted in the pleadings that the primary period of limitation under section 11 of the Limitation Act 1980 and the secondary period under section 14 (three years from the date of knowledge) had expired.

There was no issue taken (for the purposes of the trial on limitation) on whether the Claimant had suffered abuse or that such abuse contributed materially to her mental state. Nonetheless the Defendant reserved its right to question the Claimant on those issues at any eventual trial on liability.

2 comments:

disgraceful - said...

.... and Camden Council keeps getting 4 Stars from the Commission.

are they deaf and blind or what ?

Anonymous said...

Kensington and Chelsea are not far behind, Moira Gibb used to be head of SSD here - I have written to her via the government-will email copies, they have made life hell for me and my child, as well as friends of mine - hate crimes and cover ups