This website uses cookies

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. By using our website, you agree to our Privacy Policy

Nicola Laver

Editor, Solicitors Journal

Sex abuse victim wins record-breaking compensation

News
Share:
Sex abuse victim wins record-breaking compensation

By

An abuse victim has been awarded more than £1.1m in damages, the biggest ever award in the UK courts for a survivor of child sexual abuse

An abuse victim has been awarded more than £1.1m in damages, the biggest ever award in the UK courts for a survivor of child sexual abuse.

The victim suffered years of abuse by convicted abuser and secondary school teacher, Andrew Adams.

The claim was brought against Haringey Council which denied responsibility, even though Adams pleaded guilty in criminal proceedings.

The court rejected Adams’ claim as “inconceivable” that the victim, at 13 years old, had groomed him.

The abuse continued until he was 21.

David McClenaghan, head of the abuse claims team at Bolt Burdon Kemp who represented the claimant, said that despite his client’s bravery in reporting the abuse, he still faced “unsavoury challenges” to his compensation claim.

He commented: “The London Borough of Haringey, who had employed Adams, and accepted that he had abused my client whilst he was a pupil within their care, sought to have his claim dismissed entirely on the basis it was brought ‘outside the time limit’.

“They further sought to minimise his case by arguing that he had consented to some of the acts of abuse and that the abuse could not have caused him the harm he described."

Bolt Burdon Kemp urged organisations and institutions to acknowledge their past failings where children have suffered abuse while in their care, and to deal with victims and survivors responsibly.

It said “too often the organisation at the heart of a scandal publicly condemns the acts of abuse and states that their ‘thoughts are with the victim’ whilst privately challenging that same victim in legal proceedings and seeking to have their case dismissed due to legal technicalities”.