The European Court of Human Rights has held that the appeal by a victim of sexual abuse against a decision of the Supreme Court is admissible. The case concerns Ms O’Keeffe who was sexually abused by her teacher when she was 8 years old. Ms O’Keeffe started proceedings against the State in 1998, on the ground that the State was legally liable for the abuse.
The appeal to the ECtHR followed decisions of the High Court and the Supreme Court in 2006 and 2009 respectively that the State was not liable. The State argued that the case should be inadmissible as Ms O’Keeffe had not exhausted all her legal remedies in Ireland. This was based on the fact that she had not sued the Bishop who was a patron and owner of the Catholic school. However, the European Court held that Ms O’Keeffe was not required to have attempted to sue the Bishop as she chose to sue the State. The court held that she was entitled to choose which domestic remedy she would pursue. The court held that “she chose to pursue to the Supreme Court an action alleging State responsibility for the abuse on the basis of vicarious liability and the court considers this was a reasonable choice...Finally, the court considers, in the light of the parties’ submissions, that these complaints under Articles 3, 8, 13, 14, and Article 2 of Protocol No.1 raise serious issues of fact and law under the Convention, the determination of which requires an examination of the merits”.
Ms O’Keeffe had made further complaints under Articles 6 and 13 about the length of her civil proceedings and that she had no effective domestic remedy. The government offered to settle those complaints on the basis of payment of a sum for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages as well as a payment for costs and expenses. Ms O’Keeffe accepted the offer and the court therefore held that it would strike out those complaints.
The judgment is a step forward for victims of sexual abuse in Ireland as it shows the recognition of the European Court of the importance of a decision on State responsibility in this matter. It also displays the fact that the State was willing to settle the claim of delay.
Click here to read the judgment.
Click here to read an article on the case in the Irish Times.