A Supreme Court judge concluded that the State should be held vicariously liable for sexual abuse suffered by Louise O’Keeffe while she was a pupil at Dunderrow National School in Kinsale, Co Cork, in 1973.
Mr Justice Geoghegan said he would allow Ms O’Keeffe’s appeal from a High Court finding that the State was not vicariously liable for assaults committed by school principal Leo Hickey. Mr Hickey was not substantively involved in the appeal because judgment had already been obtained against him and damages assessed in the High Court.
The issue addressed by Mr Justice Geoghegan was whether the relationship between the State and an ordinary Catholic national school was sufficiently close to make the State legally responsible for the principal’s wrongdoing even though it was not his contractual employer.
The judge examined evidence about the national school system in detail. Teachers were appointed by school managers, but their appointments required State approval. Department inspectors assessed teachers and schools, investigated complaints and reported to the Department. The Minister also had significant disciplinary powers, including withdrawal of a teacher’s recognition, effectively preventing further employment as a recognised teacher.
Mr Justice Geoghegan stressed that there was no finding that the Department or its inspector knew about the abuse at the time. His conclusion was instead based on vicarious liability, which can impose responsibility without personal fault.
He described the relationship between Church management, teachers and the State as a distinctive triangular arrangement. Applying modern principles of vicarious liability, including the connection between an enterprise and risks created by its activities, he found the State’s role went well beyond paying salaries and prescribing a curriculum.
He concluded that the connection between the State and the risk was sufficient to impose liability and said it would be unjust to exempt the State. This judgment records Mr Justice Geoghegan’s conclusion; it does not itself state the final disposition reached by the full Supreme Court.