Perpetrators of sexual abuse are legally responsible for the damage caused by the abuse. But what about institutions? Perpetrators of abuse are often in positions of trust within institutions such as the Catholic Church, Boy Scouts, or a School Board.
There are two common legal principles used to make institutions pay for the damage caused by sexual abuse by an employee or volunteer. The first is vicarious liability. If the abuser uses his or her position of trust to perpetrate the abuse and the abuse is sufficiently connected to the job-related duties of the perpetrator, the institution will likely be held liable (legally responsible) through principle of vicarious liability.
Even in situations where the abuse is not connected to the job-related duties of the perpetrator the institution can be found liable if it was negligent. If an institution had prior knowledge or reason to suspect improper sexual conduct by an employee and failed to remove that employee from his position of trust, negligence typically follows. This was result in K.M.M. v. Diocese of London1 and J.R.S. v. Glendinning,2 both cases involving the Catholic Diocese of London which had either direct reports of abuse (K.M.M) or reasons to suspect improper sexual conduct by their employees (J.R.S.). In both cases the institution was held liable in negligence.
This was also the result in the decision of S.L. v. R.T.M.3 where the Jury found the Hastings and Prince Edward District School Board negligent for failing to prevent the abuse suffered by S.L. despite the fact that there were no direct reports or allegations of abuse to school board officials. This was again the result in the O’Connell4 case in which the Court found the School Board negligent.
Overall, there are many legal tools available to assist victims of abuse with holding their perpetrator and any connected institutions accountable through a civil lawsuit. For more information feel free to reach out to a lawyer at Beckett Injury Lawyers.
1 NSPCC, K.M.M. v The Roman Catholic Episcopal Corp., 2011 ONSC 2143 https://canlii.ca/t/fl3w8
2 J.R.S. v Glendinning, 2004 CanLII 5011, https://canlii.ca/t/1hkzl
3 S.L. v R.T.M., [2013] OJ No 1541 (SCJ).
4 O’Connell v. Williamson and Trillium Lakelands School Board, 2020 ONSC 3874 (SCJ) at para 51, https://canlii.ca/t/j8vtm
