Reilly -v- Devereux & ors [2009] IESC 22 (24 March 2009)

Reilly -v- Devereux & ors [2009] IESC 22 (24 March 2009)

The Defence Forces were neither vicariously liable nor negligent for the sexual assaults committed by the plaintiff's superior officer. The relationship did not meet the criteria for vicarious liability as established in Irish law, and there was no evidence that the employer was on notice or failed in its duty of care. The plaintiff, an adult soldier, had access to complaint procedures and did not avail of them. The High Court's findings of fact were supported by evidence and not to be disturbed on appeal.

Citation
[2009] IESC 22
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Raymond Reilly; Defendant/respondent: Patrick Devereux; Defendant/respondent: The Minister for Defence; Defendant/respondent: Ireland; Defendant/respondent: The Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
24 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Vicarious Liability, Negligence, Sexual Assault, Personal Injury, Statute of Limitations
Tort Law Employment Law Vicarious Liability Negligence Sexual Assault Personal Injury Statute of Limitations

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 6 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raymond Reilly

Plaintiff/appellant

Patrick Devereux

Defendant/respondent

The Minister for Defence

Defendant/respondent

Ireland

Defendant/respondent

The Attorney General

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the State and its agents were vicariously liable for sexual assaults committed by a superior officer against the plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether the State and its agents were negligent in failing to prevent or respond to the assaults

Ratio Decidendi

The Defence Forces were neither vicariously liable nor negligent for the sexual assaults committed by the plaintiff's superior officer. The relationship did not meet the criteria for vicarious liability as established in Irish law, and there was no evidence that the employer was on notice or failed in its duty of care. The plaintiff, an adult soldier, had access to complaint procedures and did not avail of them. The High Court's findings of fact were supported by evidence and not to be disturbed on appeal.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • High Court order affirmed