The Christian Brothers have transferred property so it is now beyond the reach of a man seeking damages for historical sex abuse, it has been claimed.
The claim, which is denied, was made on Tuesday in the High Court in relation to land in Glasnevin, Dublin; Mount Merrion, Dublin; a gate lodge on Griffith Avenue, Dublin 9; and number 10, Rosmeen Gardens, Dún Laoghaire, Dublin.
The claim was made in a case in which Kenneth Grace is seeking to sue the congregation for damages arising from sexual abuse suffered while a student at Westland Row CBS, Dublin, in the 1980s.
The former principal of the school, Paul Hendrick, was jailed for four years last week in the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court for the abuse, for which he pleaded guilty, with the last six months of the sentence suspended if he attends counselling.
Mark O'Connell: The mystery is not why we Irish have responded to Israel’s barbarism. It’s why others have not
The music of 2024: Our critics’ verdicts on the best albums and acts of the year
‘One Christmas Day my brother set me on fire’: seven writers spill their most bizarre Yuletide yarns
Kellie Harrington fought hard for the dream ending she well deserved
In an affidavit to the High Court, solicitor Philip Treacy, of Coleman Legal, on behalf of Mr Grace, said he was concerned the Christian Brothers might be “attempting to protect its assets by putting them out of reach and so as to frustrate any recovery of damages which the plaintiff would be entitled to following a positive determination” of his client’s claim.
He outlined to the court four property transfers which, he said, had all taken place since the High Court proceedings were initiated in 2019. One property transfer took place in February of this year.
Because the congregation, which is not an incorporated entity, has opted not to put forward a nominee to be sued on its behalf, Mr Grace has had to sue more than one hundred mostly elderly Christian Brothers to advance his case. This has meant he has accumulated huge legal costs and has had to repeatedly return to court seeking new orders.
Mr Treacy said that some of the brothers who are now defendants in the case used to hold property in trust for the congregation but have now transferred ownership of the property to third parties not connected with the proceedings. In other cases properties have been sold.
The house in Dún Laoghaire, he said, was formerly owned by three brothers who are defendants in the case but was transferred in May of last year to a company called Christian Brothers CLG.
Land at Oatlands, Mount Merrion, and in Glasnevin, have been sold to property companies, while the house on Griffith Avenue has been sold to private owners.
Mr Treacy told Mr Justice Tony O’Connor he believes the property transfers show a concerted practice that may be a systematic effort by the defendants to divest themselves of assets “to frustrate recovery of damages” by his client.
Why is it so difficult to sue the Christian Brothers?
The plaintiff has already secured judgment in default against ninety of the brothers who have been made defendants in the case but have not appointed lawyers to represent them or responded to being served with legal papers. Other defendants are living abroad and are in the process of being contacted. No defence has yet been filed in the case.
Brother Gibson and the man he replaced as the head of the congregation in Ireland, Brother Edmund Garvey, are both represented in the case in their personal capacities. Hendrick is also a defendant.
Karl Finnegan BL, for brothers Gibson and Garvey, read out a responding affidavit from a solicitor from Buttimer solicitors, Emma Leahy, who said Mr Treacy’s claims are not relevant to her clients and that she is not on record for the defendants towards whom the plaintiff’s claims are addressed.
However she contested the claim that assets were being shielded from the plaintiff and suggested that mediation was being resisted.,
The judge had the power to direction mediation, she said.
“There is no intention to hide assets from the plaintiff,” Mr Finnegan said. “There is a desire to resolve the matter.”
Asked by Mr Justice O’Connor if his clients had averred that there would be assets there to meet any settlement, Mr Finnegan said it was not usual that a defendant would be asked that, but his clients were suggesting mediation “with a legitimate intention.”
John Gordon SC, for Mr Grace, said it was unique in his experience that the head of a religious order would say they wish to go into mediation but has entered an appearance in a case as a private citizen. The Christian Brothers were “probably unique” in opting not to nominate someone for the purpose of the litigation when dealing with this type of litigation.
“Why have they don’t this to Kenneth Grace? What is the purpose?”, he said. More than one hundred members of the congregation had not entered an appearance “apparently on advice from somebody”.
The purpose, he said, appeared to be to put others off suing the Christian Brothers. “What a horrible agenda, what a distasteful, despicable agenda, but that is the agenda unless I am completely wrong in my assessment of their agenda.”
Now, he said, the order was “actively involved in divesting itself of assets, the only outcome of which can be that those with claims are left with less to compensate them.”
The more than one hundred defendants in the case were no doubt embarrassed by what was happening “because they are no doubt good Christians.”
They have been put in the position they are in by their provincial, bro Gibson, for some reason, he said. “Probably because he thinks it is good business.”
Mr Justice O’Connor is to give his ruling on the mediation application in the afternoon.
