BishopAccountability.org
	High Court of England & Wales: Catholic Bishops Can Be Held Liable for Abuse Committed by Priests< By Ann Olivarius Ao Advocates November 9, 2011 http://www.aoadvocates.com/Posts/Blog/97/High-Court-of-England--and--Wales-Catholic-Bishops-can-be-held-Liable-for-Abuse-Committed-by-Priests.aspx Read the full court ruling here. In what may well prove a watershed moment for civil cases of sexual abuse by Catholic priests, a ruling yesterday in the High Court of England and Wales found that Catholic bishops can be held liable for abuse committed by priests working in their dioceses. Tracey Emmott, the claimant's solicitor, noted that this "was the first time the court has found that the church was legally responsible for acts of abuse by some of its priests." No English court has previously ruled on this specific aspect of what is known as "vicarious liability." The Court's affirmation that bishops and dioceses may be held to account for the misdeeds of priests under their control is a critical step forward for survivors of abuse, and for justice. The case at hand, JGE v The English Province of Our Lady of Charity & Another, involves claims of repeated sexual abuse by Father Wilfred Baldwin against a woman known by her initials JGE, occurring at a children's home in Hampshire some 40 years ago. Father Baldwin died in 2006. Unless the church authorities who supervised him can be held liable, she would have no legal redress. In his thoughtful decision, Mr Justice MacDuff reviewed the history of court decisions in this area of the law for guidance on the crux of the problem—whether priests can be treated as something like "employees" of their bishop, even though many usual indicators of employment (such as regular wages and employment contracts) are missing. The law is well established that "normal" employers can be liable for employees' misdeeds – for example, someone injured because a bus driver was careless may be able to sue the company that owns the bus and hired the driver. But churches have argued that priests are not really employees; they are independent agents, performing their ministry for God, not for any earthly organization. Mr Justice MacDuff's reasoning is firmly based in English case law, but he also quoted favourably a Canadian Supreme Court case, Doe v Bennett, which held that: The priest is reasonably perceived as an agent of the diocesan enterprise. The relationship between the bishop and the priest is sufficiently close. Applying the relevant test to the facts, it is also clear that the necessary connection between the employer-created or enhanced risk and the wrong complained of is established. As a result of this, Mr Justice MacDuff found that Baldwin's "akin-to-employer", the Diocese of Portsmouth, could indeed be found vicariously liable for the multiple rapes she alleges. Father Baldwin was appointed by and on behalf of the Defendants. He was so appointed in order to do their work; to undertake the ministry on behalf of the Defendants for the benefit of the church. He was given the full authority of the Defendants to fulfill that role. He was provided with the premises, the pulpit and the clerical robes. He was directed into the community with that full authority and was given free rein to act as representative of the church. He had been trained and ordained for that purpose. He had immense power handed to him by the Defendants. It was they who appointed him to the position of trust which (if the allegations be proved) he so abused." The extent of the Diocese's liability and other facts of the case are to be assessed later on at trial. Canon lawyer and noted expert in the field, Thomas Doyle, says that the ruling "cuts to the heart of the priest-parishioner relationship. It acknowledges the dependency that exists between a Catholic lay person, who is taught he or she must subject themselves to the power and authority of the priest, and members of the clergy, both priests and bishops." But the Church's argument to the court that the bishop's role was only advisory, not supervisory, "could not be more contrary to the actual nature of the bishop-priest relationship both in theory and in practice." Although leave to appeal the case has been granted to the Diocese, for now there is great reason for optimism that Roman Catholic dioceses will feel additional pressure from the civil law to stop the epidemic of child abuse that has besmirched its reputation and caused thousands of children to suffer. Priest or bishop, they're all in it together now.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.