The Catholic Church is not liable for the sexual abuse suffered by a man over 30 years ago, the High Court has ruled. He said he was abused as a boy by Fr Christopher Clonan while he served at Coventry's Church of Christ the King. Police believe Clonan died in 1998.
Mr Justice Jack said he was satisfied the essence of the man's evidence was true and that he was sexually abused.
But he said the Church was not liable as the man, now 45, cleaned for Clonan "which was not a priestly activity".
Mr Justice Jack found in favour of the Trustees of the Birmingham Archdiocese of the Roman Catholic Church, who had denied liability.
The man, who can be identified only as Maga, has learning difficulties and has never worked.
Appeal permission
He was aged 12 or 13 when he was abused by the priest over many months in about 1976, the court heard.
He sought legal action in 2006, after learning another man who was abused by Clonan had recovered damages from the Catholic Church.
Mr Justice Jack, sitting in London, said Maga had been associated with Clonan because he cleaned the priest's car, cleaned the presbytery and other houses and ironed Clonan's clothes.
The judge said it meant the assaults on Maga were not so closely connected with Clonan's employment that it would be fair to hold the Catholic Church liable.
He said: "That employment was not a priestly activity.
"Fr Clonan did not do anything to draw the claimant into the activities of the Church."
Maga, who brought the case through the official solicitor, was given permission to appeal.
Clonan is believed to have died in Australia in 1998. He was on the run from British police at the time.
He has cost the Catholic Church about £1m in compensation payments.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Disclaimer
No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to us or to the blogspot ‘Clerical Whispers’ for any or all of the articles placed here.
The placing of an article hereupon does not necessarily imply that we agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.
Source (BBC)
SV (ED)
Again this is using any angle to get themselves out of trouble to say it was not a Priestly activity.
ReplyDeleteIf this poor man was abused on Church premises while cleaning the Presbytery where the Priest lived then it seems the Church are in complete denial to say they are not liable especially when he was a known abuser and they have paid out before.
I wonder is that because the Church are discriminating against paying the man because he has a learning disability and they think he is not capable of fighting them in an appeal.
Lets hope they can appeal his case and look into it a bit more.
The fact it is believed that he was abused is a tragedy to treat one of the already marginalised like this when he has not ever had a proper job and income and could do with the compensation for what he obviously went through to make his life a bit more comfortable.
The Church has no conscience and this proves it yet again! They tell the laity to examine their conscience - what about doing it themselves!
When you are an institution rich in material wealth it is difficult to really have the humility to do what Jesus would do .
ReplyDelete