Sheriff orders Christian monks to pay nearly £1.4 million to man abused as a child

About this case:

• Citation:
  [2022] SC EDIN 7
• Judgment:
  External link
• Court:
  Sheriff Court
• Judge:
  Sheriff Dickson

Senior counsel for the pursuer, AB, had sought a combined award of £1,741,107, based on solatium, loss of past and future earnings, pension loss, and the cost of medical treatment. The defender sought decree of absolvitor, or otherwise that damages ought to be restricted to solatium only.

The case was heard by Sheriff Christopher Dickson in the All-Scotland Sheriff Personal Injury Court. Di Rollo QC appeared for the pursuer and Mackenzie QC for the defender.

Culture of abuse

Between February 1980 and April 1981, the pursuer was a resident at St Ninian’s School in Falkland, Fife, due to family difficulties. During his time at the school he was placed under the care of three monks, who abused him in various ways including physical and sexual assault. The pursuer gave evidence that the monks would come into his dormitory at night while playing David Bowie’s song Ashes to Ashes and take him back to their rooms for abuse.

The pursuer, who became dependent on drugs and alcohol after leaving school, did not tell anyone about the abuse he suffered until 2013, after his older brother, EF, disclosed to the police that he was also abused. Until then, the pursuer did not know that others had been abused at the school. Two of the monks, Brothers Kelly and Farrell, were convicted of various charges in the High Court of Justiciary in July 2016, with a third monk having died in 2013. However, the brothers were cleared of charges they faced in respect of the pursuer.

In his evidence, the pursuer stated he had found it difficult to hold down a job after leaving school with no qualifications, and that he had been worried that other people would find out about the abuse he suffered. Evidence was also led that his symptoms were indicative of post-traumatic stress disorder as well as mixed anxiety and depressive disorder.

Counsel for the pursuer submitted that the evidence established a culture of abuse at the school, and that his problems were firmly rooted in the abuse he had suffered there. The evidence of the expert witnesses supported the contention that the pursuer’s employment capacity had been almost completely destroyed, and that his current symptoms were unlikely to significantly improve.

In response, it was submitted for the defender that the pursuer ought to be found an unreliable witness, given that the events he alleged happened 41 years ago and his recollection would have been corrupted by the passage of time. When the evidence was looked at in its entirety there were numerous factors which could have caused the pursuer’s psychiatric difficulties.

Miserable time

In his decision, Sheriff Dickson said of the evidence of abuse: “The pursuer was quite vague as regards the details of the abuse that he alleged occurred in the school. However, I considered that this was entirely understandable, given the passage of time since the events occurred, the repeated nature of the alleged abuse and his age at the time of the events.”

However, he continued: “When I considered all the evidence, and, in particular the evidence of EF, the agreed evidence of the commission by Brother Farrell of offences set out in the charges he was convicted of, the extra judicial admissions made by the defender, the pursuer’s emotional reaction when giving his police statement and, to a limited extent, the content of the pursuer’s GP records, I considered there was a considerable amount of evidence that supported the pursuer’s account of the abuse he suffered.”

Turning to causation, the sheriff noted: “After considering all the evidence I came to the view that it was more likely that not that the pursuer was abusing substances to attempt to manage the anxiety he was experiencing as a result of the abuse he suffered at the school. I considered that the pursuer, given his disadvantaged background, may have misused substances even if he had not suffered abuse at the school, but I did not think it would have been as chronic or enduring as it ultimately was.”

He went on to say: “In all the circumstances and taking account of what I have already said about the pursuer’s substances misuse difficulties, I have concluded, on the balance of probabilities, the abuse suffered by the pursuer at the school could not be dismissed under the de minimis principle and that, on a balance of probabilities, it materially contributed to the pursuer’s persistent depressive disorder and generalised anxiety disorder.”

Sheriff Dickson concluded: “The pursuer thought that he was the only boy suffering abuse and I consider that his time at the school must have been miserable for him. I have held that the abuse materially contributed to both his substance misuse problems and his diagnosis of anxiety and depression. It also caused his PTSD. The pursuer’s substance misuse problems, coupled with his anxiety, depression and PTSD have had a devastating impact on his life.”

The sheriff therefore concluded that the defender was liable for damages. He went on to assess solatium at £95,000, interest on compensation at £73,990, past wage loss at £1,008,937, pension loss at £23,100, and cost of future treatment at £2,200, for a total award of £1,393,270.