[Louise O’Keefe, top, and the press release about her victory from the European Court of Human Rights this morning]
Ms O’Keeffe took legal action against the Department of Education, arguing that the State had failed to put in place appropriate protection measures to prevent and stop systematic sexual abuse at her school.
However, the High Court dismissed her claim that the State was liable.
The Supreme Court subsequently upheld that ruling, finding that while the State funded the education system, the management role of the Catholic Church was such that the State could not be held vicariously liable for the criminal acts of the teacher.
The European Court of Human Rights was Ms O’Keeffe’s final legal opportunity to have the Irish State held liable for the sexual abuse she suffered.
European Court of Human Rights finds State liable for sexual abuse (RTE)
What’s it all about?
Legal Coffee Drinker writes:
This case and its finding that Ireland breached the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights raises interesting implications given the terms of the European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003.
In particular Section 3 which provides that every organ of the State shall perform its functions in a manner compatible with the State’s obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights and that a person who has suffered injury, loss or damage as a result of a contravention of this obligation may, if no other remedy is available, institute proceedings to recover damages from the State, provided that same are instituted within one year of the breach.
Although the strict time limit may limit the application of this section in respect of sexual abuse which has taken place more than a year ago, the possible liability of the State under Section 3 in respect of acts of abuse going forward, is likely to have very significant repercussions.
However we will have to await the judgment to see the extent to which the finding as to the State’s liability was based on the particular facts of Ms O’Keefe’s case and the serious and blatant nature of the abuse to which the State appears to have turned a blind eye.
As regards past acts of sexual abuse it’s also worth noting that a court hearing an application under Section 3 has the power to extend the time limit backwards where this is regarded as required in the interest of justice
.