BishopAccountability.org
	Catholic Church in Birmingham Held Liable for Abuse of Disabled Boy By Ruth Gledhill The Times March 22, 2010 http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhill/2010/03/catholic-church-in-birmingham-held-liable-for-abuse-of-disabled-boy.html Father Christopher Clonan, who is believed to have died in Australia while on the run from the police, has cost the Catholic Church about ?1 million so far in compensation. Last week he cost it another ?32,500 after the Birmingham Archdiocese lost its case against a victim, a boy with learning difficulties known as Maga, who washed the priest's car for him. Financial difficulties caused by compensation payments are also besetting the Irish Church, where parishioners are being asked to bail out the Ferns diocese as part of their 'God-given responsibility.' The finances of the Roman Catholic Church in Dublin are also under severe pressure. Abuse victim support groups were dismayed last year when Mr Justice Jack held that the church was neither vicariously liable as Father Clonan’s employer nor had the church been in breach of a duty of care to the boy, as this could not be owed by the church to individuals who were not themselves members of the congregation. Frances Gibb covered this for The Times. Read the Birmingham Post report here. The BBC also carried a story. Below is the full statement from the solicitors. It is odd that some are unable to distinguish between being anti-Catholic and anti-paedophile. For example, I am not anti-Catholic and have written often in praise of Pope Benedict XVI and indeed still hold that his first encyclical was a masterpiece of love. Like CathCon, who carries today a full list of German priest abusers, I believe the world needs a strong Church. I was criticised once again for being an apologist for the Pope when I said this on Sky at the weekend. But I am indeed anti-paedophile and am not ashamed or afraid to say so. Repeatedly. I make these comments in the light of remarks by Cardinal Bagnasco, head of Italy's bishops. He believes the Catholic Church is being unfairly singled out for criticism and has warned that the Church will not tolerate this. This prompted a robust response from the US survivors' network SNAP, which is this week launching a European branch to help victims of Catholic abuse over here. National director David Clohessy said: ' Catholic officials are the culprits here, not the victims. To suggest that hundreds of deeply wounded European men and women are somehow conspiring with unethical journalists hurts the very individuals the Pope says he cares about and who are acting responsibly. 'The brave victims who are coming forward are helping, not hurting, the Catholic church. They are doing what the Pope, Bagnasco and their colleagues should have done decades ago: exposing predators, warning parents, protecting kids and disclosing truth. 'They are to be commended and well supported, not vilified and further demeaned. Bagnasco's remarks contradict the Popes professed sympathy for abuse victims and contribute to the centuries-old and still-prevalent culture of secrecy in the church surrounding child sex crimes and cover ups. Sometimes Catholics wonder why victims can't speak up sooner. This is one reason- because of the hostility of so-called spiritual figures who profess to be compassionate shepherds but act like cold-hearted CEOs. 'Among the many steps the Pope could and should take to protect the vulnerable and heal the wounded, here's another one: forbid his staff to shift blame, point fingers, divert attention, shoot the messenger and intimidate other victims into staying silent. He can't have it both ways, claiming to care but ignoring these attacks.' Yet in many cases, such as the Maga case highlighted in this post, the Church not only ignored the attacks but has tried to evade responsibility for them through the courts. Carlton Rae of the solicitors Clifton Ingram, who handled the Maga case highlighted above, believes the judgement is 'a milestone in the development of the law regarding the liability of the church for acts of child abuse committed by its representatives.' The statement from Clifton Ingram continues below: 'Lord Neuberger, Master of the Rolls, sitting with Lord Justice Longmore and Lady Justice Smith in the Court of Appeal have overturned a High Court decision made in 2009 and found that the Roman Catholic Church is indeed liable for the child abuse committed by one of its priests regardless of whether or not the victim was a member of the congregation. 'In the appealed ruling of last year Mr Justice Jack had accepted that in the late 1970s Father Clonan had perpetrated acts of sexual abuse against a vulnerable young boy with learning disabilities. 'Mr Justice Jack also accepted that allegations of Father Clonan’s inappropriate behaviour towards young boys had been made to his superior and that the church had been negligent in failing to take appropriate steps. 'However, Mr Justice Jack held that the church was neither vicariously liable as Father Clonan’s employer nor had the church been in breach of a duty of care to the boy as this could not be owed by the church to individuals who were not themselves members of the congregation. 'This decision caused concern among many involved in such cases at the time. 'The three Court of Appeal judges have decided that Mr Justice Jack was too restrictive in his application of the law of vicarious liability.'Lord Neuberger held that it was Father Clonan’s role as a priest that gave him the status and opportunity to draw the victim into his sexually abusive orbit by ostensibly respectable means connected with his employment as a priest at the church. 'As it was the church that gave him this special role and status, then the church was liable as his employer when he exploited this for his own ends. 'Furthermore The Master of the Rolls said the church’s failure to monitor Father Clonan once allegations of sexual abuse had been made was “unforgiveable”. He also concluded that the church did indeed owe a duty of care not just to the congregation but to any young boy with whom Father Clonan was known to be associating. The church was therefore liable also for this breach of a duty of care in addition its liability as his employer. 'Both Lord Justice Longmore and Lady Justice Smith agreed with this analysis and the Claimant’s appeals were successful. 'The legal team acting for the Birmingham Archdiocese of the Roman Catholic Church had also tried to appeal other aspects of Mr Justice Jack’s judgement. They had sought to challenge rulings on the victim’s mental capacity and also argued that it was impossible for the church to have fair hearing over 30 years after the event. 'The Court of Appeal held that these were questions of fact to be determined by Mr Justice Jack and that he had properly formed his judgement on these points. The Defendants' appeals were dismissed.' Carlton Rae said: “The victim is a vulnerable individual who has been put through five years of legal argument before achieving for some measure of justice. This action had to be conducted on his behalf by the Official Solicitor as he would not have been able to cope with the rigours of High Court litigation on his own. This judgement makes clear that when a church clothes its priests or pastors with a special status in the community then the church has to ensure that the trust that is placed on them is not subverted. This decision also reaffirms the court’s discretion to hear sexual abuse cases when the offence took place outside the normal limitation period in circumstances where it is fair and just to do so.'
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.