Thousands of sex abuse victims may be able to sue their attackers years after the offences following a Law Lords ruling involving Lotto rapist Iorworth Hoare.The Lords ruled that a woman whose life was ruined following an attempted rape by Hoare has the right to pursue a damages claim against him.
The retired teacher, identified only as Mrs A, hailed the judgment.
She was among five sex attack victims who went to the House of Lords seeking a review of the law which bars them from taking action because their claims are outside a six-year time limit.
Mrs A received just £5,000 from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board after Hoare was jailed for life in 1989.
When Hoare, 59, won £7 million on the Lotto Extra while on day release late in 2004 she filed for damages. He previously had no financial assets.
The other four cases, all involving alleged victims of child abuse, could signal an opening of the floodgates for historic abuse claims, with judges now allowed the discretion to decide whether the time bar of the Limitation Act can be extended.
Previously, sexual abuse victims were prevented from bringing a claim more than six years after the offence or, in child abuse cases, more than six years after the victim reached 18. Beyond the age of 24, the victims were therefore no longer able to file successfully.
Kevin Young, one of the victims whose case was heard alongside Mrs A, is bringing claims against Catholic Care and the Home Office.
Mr Young, 49, of York, was one of five young inmates abused by prison officer Neville Husband in 1977 while serving a short sentence at Medomsley Detention Centre, Co Durham. Husband, who became a church minister, was jailed for eight years in 2003.
Mr Young also claims he was abused at a residential Catholic school in Tadcaster, between 1974 and 1976.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to either myself 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 I agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.
Sotto Voce