Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Court of Appeal allows appeal of a decision of the High Court directing that the respondent/plaintiff recover damages in the sum of €210,000 (inclusive of aggravated damages of €10,000) against the first and second defendant, and remits the matter to the High Court for rehearing, on the grounds: (a) there were significant and material errors in the trial judge’s engagement with the evidence and in the findings of fact made (or omitted to be made) by him; (b) the trial judge failed to engage with key elements of the case made by the defendants and these failings went to the very core of his findings; (c) the absence from the judgment of any engagement with the submissions of the parties and of any clear findings on the issue of whether the plaintiff consented to the activity leads inevitably to the conclusion that the findings of assault and abuse must be set aside; (d) the trial judge's findings in relation to the Statute of Limitations must be set aside as it was not possible to ascertain, with any degree of confidence, the reasons why the trial judge made the findings that he did on the limitation issue; (e) the trial judge erred in finding that any elements of the plaintiff's claim after she turned 18 were not statute barred; and (f) the application for the trial judge to recuse himself did not come close to meeting the applicable threshold for a recusal.
Collins J (nem diss): Appeal of a decision of the High Court directing that the respondent/plaintiff recover damages in the sum of €210,000 (inclusive of aggravated damages of €10,000) against the first and second defendant - personal injuries - grooming - sexual abuse - the plaintiff claimed that, between 2004 and 2007, while she was a pupil in the second defendant school, she was physically and sexually assaulted, falsely imprisoned and sexually abused by the first defendant, who was a religion teacher in the school and was also its Chaplain - the first defendant at all times denied that he ever had any form of sexual relations with the plaintiff - the defendants argued that in the alternative were in any event consensual and uncoerced - all disputed issues of fact were resolved by the the trial judge in favour of the plaintiff - whether there was any basis for interfering with the trial judge’s factual findings - Hay v O’ Grady [1992] 1 IR 210 - the trial judge made a finding that the first defendant had falsely imprisoned the plaintiff when there was no evidential basis for it - whether the plaintiff consented to the activity - section 3(7) of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2006 - whether the matter should be dismissed or remitted to the High Court - whether there was a legal basis for the tort of grooming - not appropriate to deal with that issue in these appeals - whether the claims were statute barred - section 48A of the Statute of Limitations 1957 - whether the trial judge should have recused himself following comments he made about clerical sex abuse - appeal allowed - matter remitted to the High Court for hearing.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
The only subject matter index for all Irish judgments over the past thirteen years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now