Man sexually abused by priest at Irvine Catholic primary school awarded £627,000 in damages

3 Mar 2025 

By Mitchell Skilling

A man who was sexually abused by a priest at a Roman Catholic primary school when he was five or six and developed Complex Post Traumatic Stress Disorder as a result of that and other abuse has been awarded £627,000 in damages by the Outer House of the Court of Session.

The anonymous pursuer, F, argued that significant weight ought to be ascribed to his experiences at the school in assessment of damages. The action came to proceed solely against the Roman Catholic Diocese of Galloway, originally convened as second defender, which argued that other abuse the pursuer suffered later in life was an equal contributor to his mental health issues.

The case was heard by Lord Clark. Milligan KC and McCaffery, advocate, appeared for the pursuer and Primrose KC and Rolfe, advocate, for the second defender.

Most significant factor

In the late 1970s, the pursuer was a pupil at St Mark’s primary school in Irvine. When he was aged five to six, he was subjected to physical abuse and very serious sexual abuse by a priest, including anal penetration. He was later physically and sexually abused again when he was a boarding school pupil at Fort Augustus Abbey secondary school. He developed Complex Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and in 2012 stopped working as he felt unable to continue.

The defender accepted that the abuse of the pursuer at St Mark’s took place and accepted vicarious liability for the conduct of the priest. The issue remaining in dispute was the extent of loss, injury and damage caused by that abuse, having regard to the other adverse experiences suffered by the pursuer at Fort Augustus Abbey and later in life.

Psychiatric experts instructed by both parties, Dr O’Neill for the pursuer and Professor Fahy and Dr de Taranto for the defender, agreed on the risk factors present in the pursuer’s childhood, including abandonment by his father and physical abuse by his stepfather. However, Dr O’Neill took the view that the abuse at St Mark’s was the most significant factor in the development of his CPTSD, while the defender’s experts ascribed roughly equal weight to his experiences at St Mark’s and Fort Augustus Abbey. Dr O’Neill also opined that the pursuer was academically bright and in the absence of the abuse would have enjoyed more success both academically and vocationally.

For the pursuer it was submitted that repeated penetrative abuse was the most severe form of childhood abuse, and the time at St Mark’s was the single biggest contributor to his CPTSD. Any inconsistencies in his evidence could be attributed to his mental ill health, and it was notable that he showed more evident distress recalling the events at St Mark’s than when recalling the events at Fort Augustus Abbey.

Find the rest of the article here