The State Government plans to axe limitations that prevent historical child abuse victims from suing

By Patrick Billings
Mercury
November 20, 2016

https://goo.gl/ubxwoc

At present victims generally have only three years from the time of abuse to commence court proceeding for damages.

In response to questions from The Mercury the State Government has revealed it will axe the limitation periods for victims of child abuse in line with recommendations from a Royal Commission into paedophilia.

“The government is taking action to abolish limitation periods in relation to civil claims for damages for victims of child sexual and physical abuse,” Attorney-General Vanessa Goodwin said.

“The drafting of new laws is currently underway … it is intended that the abolishment of the limitation period will apply retrospectively.”

The legal watershed will hopefully mean that victims like Gemma*, whose sexual abuse was ignored by child protection workers, can seek the recognition and redress that has evaded them for decades.

In the 1990s the then homeless 13-year-old fell pregnant to a man in his 20s.

Gemma had been taken in by the man’s mother.

She lost the baby but a year later fell pregnant to him again.

Recently the memories of abuse came flooding back.

Gemma gained access to her child protection files and was hit with a bombshell.

“They have statements in my files, saying they think he was taking sexual advantage of me,” she told the Mercury.

“It felt like I was reading about someone else.”

The files, seen by the Mercury, show the Community and Health Services Department were aware of Gemma’s pregnancy and her sexual relationship with the man.

One file recommends “ no further action” be taken.

Her lawyers Greg Barns and Angela Sdrinis said the files establish a direct line of responsibility to the department and a care of duty for Gemma.

But Tasmania’s current limitation period make it “ problematic” for her to launch a damages claim over the department’s negligence.

“Despite the evidence on her file that really show the department knew she was at risk and did absolutely nothing to protect her.

“It doesn’t matter how strong the liability issues are if you can’t overcome that limitation problem you’ve really got no where to go. “

Ms Sdrinis said the nature of child sex abuse meant most victims were not able to deal with their exploitation for decades afterwards.

“ The people are so damaged they bury what happened to them. They really not in a fit state to try and do anything about their claims until much further down the track,” she said.

This has been borne out in the landmark Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.

The commission found the limitation periods were “clearly inappropriate” and a “significant, sometimes insurmountable, barrier to survivors pursuing civil litigation.”

The Commission recommended they be abolished.

New South Wales, Victoria and the ACT have already scrapped their limitation laws while the Commonwealth has instructed its lawyers not to rely on them in court.

Queensland and Western Australia both have amendments before parliament

For Gemma, the chance to seek redress through the court, would “give me recognition”.

“It wasn’t my fault. I didn’t deserve the pain I suffered,” she said.

“Because without receiving ‘a sorry’ from anyone, it doesn’t feel that anyone was in the wrong apart from me.

“So if I win then I can finally let all my pain out and move on once and for all.”

*Name changed for legal reasons.