The Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal by former Defence Forces member Raymond Reilly over the State's liability for sexual assaults committed against him by a superior officer at McKee Barracks in Dublin.
Mr Justice Kearns delivered judgment on March 24, 2009, upholding the High Court's dismissal of Reilly's damages claim against the Minister for Defence, Ireland and the Attorney General.
Reilly served in the Defence Forces from 1985 until 1997. The High Court found that Sergeant Major Patrick Devereux sexually assaulted him on a number of occasions between about 1989 and 1995 and that Reilly developed post-traumatic stress disorder as a result.
The appeal concerned two issues: whether the State defendants were negligent because they should have known what was happening, and whether they were vicariously liable for Devereux's conduct because of his employment and authority over Reilly.
On negligence, Reilly relied on evidence that rumours and comments about Devereux circulated among soldiers. Other Defence Forces witnesses denied knowing of any serious allegations and described several available complaint routes.
Kearns J said the High Court had heard conflicting evidence over nine days and was entitled to resolve those conflicts. Applying the established rule that an appeal court does not simply rehear factual disputes, he found there was ample evidence supporting the conclusion that the authorities were not on sufficient notice to require intervention.
The court also rejected vicarious liability. Although Devereux had supervisory and disciplinary authority over Reilly, the relationship did not involve the kind of intimate, quasi-parental or close physical responsibilities seen in cases where employers had been held liable for sexual abuse by employees.
Kearns J said extending liability on these facts would effectively create a much broader form of State responsibility for criminal acts by Defence Forces personnel.
The appeal was therefore dismissed. A compensation arrangement between Reilly and Devereux himself was not part of the appeal.