Archbishop Bowen & Anor v JL

Archbishop Bowen & Anor v JL

The judge erred in disapplying the limitation period by failing to properly weigh the length and reasons for delay, the adverse findings against JL, and the prejudice to the appellants caused by the absence of evidence, particularly from Fr Laundy. The delay was between 21 and 23 years, and JL did not provide a good reason for the delay after the criminal prosecution. The prejudice to the appellants outweighed any prejudice to JL, making it inequitable to allow the action to proceed.

Parties
1st Appellant: Archbishop Michael George Bowen; 2nd Appellant: The Scout Association; Respondent: JL
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Trespass to the Person, Limitation Period, Vicarious Liability, Consent, Discretion Under Section 33, Burden of Proof
Tort Limitation Vicarious Liability Sexual Assault Trespass to the Person Limitation Period Consent Discretion Under Section 33 +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 7 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Archbishop Michael George Bowen

1st Appellant

The Scout Association

2nd Appellant

JL

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the limitation period should be disapplied under section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980
  2. 2 Whether the appellants were vicariously liable for the actions of Fr Laundy
  3. 3 Whether JL consented to the sexual activity at all material times

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred in disapplying the limitation period by failing to properly weigh the length and reasons for delay, the adverse findings against JL, and the prejudice to the appellants caused by the absence of evidence, particularly from Fr Laundy. The delay was between 21 and 23 years, and JL did not provide a good reason for the delay after the criminal prosecution. The prejudice to the appellants outweighed any prejudice to JL, making it inequitable to allow the action to proceed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; claim dismissed.

Orders

  • Set aside the order made by the judge.
  • Enter judgment for the Archbishop and the Scout Association.