On Thursday 8 February 2024, the High Court dismissed The Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne’s application for special leave and permitted a father of a choirboy allegedly sexually assaulted by Cardinal George Pell to seek damages from the Archdiocese.
Original decision
The plaintiff, RWQ, issued proceedings in the Supreme Court of Victoria under Part XI of the Wrongs Act 1958. RWQ, a father whose son (now deceased) had allegedly been abused by Pell, commenced proceedings against the Archdiocese of Melbourne, first defendant, and Pell, second defendant. RWQ claimed his son used illicit substances to deal with the trauma of the alleged abuse, ultimately resulting in his fatal overdose in 2014. RWQ
claimed to have suffered psychiatric injury, nervous shock, upon learning of
his son being subjected to alleged child abuse and his son’s subsequent death.
The proceeding concerned the application of the Legal Identity of Defendants (Organisational Child Abuse) Act 2018 (the Act) to the first defendant, the Archdiocese. The Archdiocese contended the application of the Act was confined to primary victims. It was argued RWQ, having never been a direct victim, should not be permitted to make a claim for damages as a secondary victim.
The Supreme Court was required to consider whether the father of the alleged victim, was permitted to initiate proceedings for injuries as a secondary victim. The Court considered the applicability of section 4(2) of the Act, finding the plain meaning of the words ‘found on or arising from child abuse’ included a claim for nervous shock brought by a parent of a child alleged to have been sexually abused. On the proper construction of section 7 of the Act a proper defendant nominated by the Archdiocese would incur any liability arising from RWQ’ S claim, despite never been directly abused.
Appeal
On 8 August 2023, the Archdiocese sought leave to appeal the decision of the Supreme Court. The Archdiocese advanced the following grounds of appeal:
Legal Arguments
-
The judge erred in concluding that:
- (a) On the proper construction of section 4(2) of the Act, the Act applies to RWQ’s claims against the Archdiocese.
- (b) On the proper construction of section 7 of the Act, a proper defendant nominated by the Archdiocese would incur any liability arising from RWQ’s claims against the application.
-
The judge ought to have concluded that, on the proper construction of sections 4 and 7, the Act does not apply to RWQ’s claims against the Archdiocese.
The Victorian Supreme Court of Appeal handed down its judgment on
25 August 2023, which refused leave to appeal. The appeal was heard before
Beach, McLeish and Kennedy JJA. Their Honours affirmed the decision of the
primary judge, finding section 4 of the Act is not limited to primary victims
of alleged sexual abuse, and confirmed the only limitation was found in section
4(1), which states a claim must be ‘founded on or arising from child abuse’.
Application for special leave
An application for special leave was filed by the Archdiocese in October 2023. On 8 February 2024, the High Court refused the Archdiocese’s application.
Implications
This decision paves the way for secondary victims and serves as precedent for secondary victims seeking compensation from organisations.
For further information
Please get in contact with Matthew Stockdale and Christina Kolovos.
If you would like to stay up to date with Alerts, news and Insights from our team, you can subscribe to our mailing list here.