A WOMAN has won a High Court battle against a North-East council which placed her in the care of a paedophile.

The woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, claims Newcastle City Council has dragged its feet over her claims of a childhood ordeal.

She is seeking a judicial review over the delays and ''ongoing failure'' by Newcastle City Council to comply with statutory time limits.

Mr Justice Richards, sitting in London, gave permission for the challenge to go ahead and said it should be heard as a matter of urgency this summer, unless the matter can be settled earlier through mediation.

Lawyers for Miss H and three other people who also allege they suffered abuse with the same foster family, are about to launch damages claims against the council in separate court proceedings.

Solicitor Judith Lloyd said: ''About 30 different children went through this placement.''

She said not all were taking legal action, adding: ''A lot have got to the stage where they want to put the past behind them.''

Miss H, now in her early twenties, was taken into care as a toddler and shortly afterwards placed with the family of a man who was later convicted of 34 counts of sexual abuse and jailed for 15 years.

In statements before the court yesterday, Miss H alleged she was abused by three men, including her foster father, over a period of 12 years. When she was nine, she told a school friend about the abuse and the allegations were reported to Newcastle social services.

But the abuse continued until Miss H ran away from her foster parents' home, where she had spent 14 years, at the age of 15.

A year later she made an initial complaint to social services officials and then lodged a formal complaint the following November.

But it was not until last December - five years later - shortly after Miss H had commenced legal proceedings, that the initial report was finally produced.

Miss H's counsel Ian Wise will argue at the High Court hearing that the local authority unlawfully exceeded the statutory time limits for handling the matter and that Miss H is entitled to damages of about £10,000 for the "distress and anxiety" caused by the council's breaches of statutory obligations under the Children Act and the 1991 Representations Procedure (Children) Regulations.