supervision or authority of the relevant organisation. Note See section 90 as to when an individual is associated with a relevant organisation. In particular, section 90(1)(c) and (d) extend the meaning of that concept in the case of delegation of the care, supervision or authority over a child to— (a) another organisation; or (b) a specified carer. (3) In a proceeding on a claim against a relevant organisation for damages in respect of the abuse of a child under its care, supervision or authority, on proof that abuse has occurred and that the abuse was committed by an individual associated with the relevant organisation, the relevant organisation is presumed to have breached the duty of care referred to in subsection (2) unless the relevant organisation proves on the balance of probabilities that it took reasonable precautions to prevent the abuse in question. Note Reasonable precautions will vary depending on factors including but not limited to— (a) the nature of the relevant organisation; and (b) the resources that are reasonably available to the relevant organisation; and (c) the relationship between the relevant organisation and the child; and (d) whether the relevant organisation has delegated the care, supervision or authority over the child to another organisation; and (e) the role in the organisation of the perpetrator of the abuse. (4) If a claim names 2 or more relevant organisations as defendants, subsection (3) applies to each relevant organisation separately.
supervision or authority of the relevant organisation. Note See section 90 as to when an individual is associated with a relevant organisation. In particular, section 90(1)(c) and (d) extend the meaning of that concept in the case of delegation of the care, supervision or authority over a child to— (a) another organisation; or (b) a specified carer. (3) In a proceeding on a claim against a relevant organisation for damages in respect of the abuse of a child under its care, supervision or authority, on proof that abuse has occurred and that the abuse was committed by an individual associated with the relevant organisation, the relevant organisation is presumed to have breached the duty of care referred to in subsection (2) unless the relevant organisation proves on the balance of probabilities that it took reasonable precautions to prevent the abuse in question. Note Reasonable precautions will vary depending on factors including but not limited to— (a) the nature of the relevant organisation; and (b) the resources that are reasonably available to the relevant organisation; and (c) the relationship between the relevant organisation and the child; and (d) whether the relevant organisation has delegated the care, supervision or authority over the child to another organisation; and (e) the role in the organisation of the perpetrator of the abuse. (4) If a claim names 2 or more relevant organisations as defendants, subsection (3) applies to each relevant organisation separately.