Vicarious Liability: Court of Appeal dismisses appeal from religious organisation following sexual assault
by yalbmert99 21 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
-
-
Fadeaway1962
Thanks
Does that mean that a legal precedent has been set for any future legal cases?
-
menrov
I read it and as I understand it, this seems like a big step forward. The WT is now considered liable for acts of their elders or ministerial servants as people in these roles behave and act as instructed by their organisation.
It will be very hard for the WT in future or other similar cases to claim that they are not responsible
-
waton
wt is responsible, elders are wt appointees. sustained in power by wt policies, wt appointed c.o.s.
it is all spirit directed, but by what spirit?
-
Vidiot
I'd give my left arm to see the GB members put to task on the witness stand, televised and on the public record.
-
Corney
On 30 March, a panel of three Supreme Court Justices agreed to hear the case Trustees of the Barry Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses v BXB. In that case, the congregation was found vicariously liable for Mark Sewell, its elder, raping a 29-year-old female congregant.
This appears to be the first case of applying a special rule for child sexual abuse to abuse of an adult. Commenting on the Court of Appeal judgment, Prof. Giliker noted that it "raises more questions than it answers" and "leaves the law in need of clarification and facing the prospect of yet another trip to the Supreme Court."
As to Mark Sewell, he was sentenced to 14 years, and claims brought by his two (then-)child victims have been settled. The plaintiff in the present case proposed to settle for £25,000, which was denied by the org. As the trial court judge noted, "the Defendants could reasonably conclude that they had stronger arguments in her case... [which] was certainly not so weak that the decision to litigate it... was itself unreasonable." Anyway, if they lost this time, their overall litigation costs will likely exceed hundreds of thousands GBP.
The case will be heard not earlier than this October.
-
Simon
There is a very clear and direct authority structure all the way down from the Governing Body through the regional, branch, district and circuit overseers down to elders and ministerial servants.
All are in their positions at the say-so of a hierarchical management structure. Hirings and firings always come from above. No one is elected by their local congregation.
This will cost them. They will need to carry insurance to cover what the representatives they have assigned do.
They can't throw up their hands and say "it had nothing to do with us" and leave local elders to carry the responsibility for what the organization directs them to do.
-
Fisherman
The WT is now considered liable for acts of their elders or ministerial servants
In the US, not always. For example, an employee on his lunch break causes personal injury to someone, employer is not liable. Claimant will also have to show in each case how Defendant was acting as an agent of the vicariously liable principal—seems to me.
-
Simon
An employee doing something in their own time is nothing todo with their employer, it's nothing that their employer has directed them todo and they are not using any specific position based on their employment. People don't lose personal liability just because someone employs them.
The liability comes from the employer putting them in a certain position and the person using that position to harm someone.
In the case of the WatchTower, the org puts them in control of people as a local authority over them and gives them access to people.
-
Corney
Their hierarchical structure is of no relevance here because Watch Tower PA didn't deny its responsibility for the congregation and "has agreed that it will satisfy any judgment against" it. The real issue at question was what relationship, if any, exists between the abuser's position as an elder and the rape, that "did not occur while Mark Sewell was performing any religious duty," but "when the two couples were choosing to be together on an essentially social occasion... There is, therefore, at least an argument that by the time of the rape Mark Sewell’s status as an elder had somewhat faded into the background"