Judge suggests Pope could intervene in Christian Brothers abuse cases

The brother's refusal to nominate a representative makes it very complicated for victims to seek damages.

The refusal to nominate a congregation representative in the case by congregation head David Gibson, makes it very complicated and costly for sexual abuse victims to seek damages.

Circuit Court president Keenan Johnson previously said this strategy was to protect the congregation’s assets.

Applications relating to three sexual abuse cases were heard in the High Court yesterday, Wednesday, November 4.

Regarding the congregation's current legal strategy, Judge Mary Rose Gearty asked if the law used by the Catholic Church for internal affairs, called canon law, may be used to get Gibson to change his stance.

The judge has strongly criticised the brothers legal positioning in the past.

Judge Gearty posed the question if Gibson would be subject to a duty under the law, allowing Pope Leo to direct him to nominate himself as congregation representative for litigation purposes.

Barrister for the three plaintiffs, Andrew Nugent, commented that “moves” had been made “in that direction”, but did not give details.

As are the majority of religious organisations, the Christian Brothers is an unincorporated association, and so in a litigation situation they must nominate a member to represent the organisation. 

However, as is the situation with the Christian Brothers, when a religious order refuses to nominate, to progress their case plaintiffs must sue every member of the congregation at the time of their assault, even though it is not being alleged all of these men were involved.

Earlier this year, a plaintiff in one case was granted permission by Judge Gearty to serve notice via a newspaper advertisement which named 341 men who were congregation members at the same times as former brother Liam Coughlan, who was involved in this case relating to child sex abuse in a Kilkenny primary in the ‘70s. 

Yesterday, the court was told by legal representatives for three of the named men that their clients had nothing to do with the case, and that they did not want to be named in any future advertisements. One said her client had found it “very upsetting and distressing”. 

The judge ruled that those who had contacted the plaintiff’s solicitor responding to the advertisement shouldn’t be named in any future newspaper ads relating to other cases.

Nugent’s application to publicise two new advertisements, informing former Christian Brothers they were being joined as defendants in two other child sex abuse cases, was granted by Judge Geary.

Significantly, it was also ruled that the ads could say future correspondence relating to the cases could be collected by defendants from the Christian Brothers headquarters, meaning law firms can write to the defendants care of (c / o) the congregation rather than to each individual as the case continues.

Gibson’s personal barrister Isabelle Aylmer, argued the correspondence could be collected from the plaintiffs solicitor, but the judge said sending correspondence to the congregation's headquarters “made more sense”.

A plaintiff in one of the new cases is seeking damages for also having been abused by Coughlan, who died in prison last month, while another concerns former Christian Brother Jack Manning, who is currently in prison for abusing students at a Dublin primary school.

The court was told by Nugent that 13 more cases would be making similar applications in relation to newspaper advertisements.