Brisbane man sues state over alleged historic child sex abuse

A Brisbane man who alleges he was sexually abused - as a 10-year-old at home - by a nurse who worked at the former Royal Children’s Hospital is suing for compensation.

The entry of the Royal Children’s Hospital which has since been demolished.

A Brisbane man who alleges he was sexually abused as a 10-year-old by a nurse who worked at the Royal Children’s Hospital, who slept at his house after he was introduced to his family by a state government employed psychologist, is suing for compensation.

The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is suing the state government alleging they are liable because child psychologist Jim McKenna and Royal Children’s Hospital worker Bronwyn Herbert, breached their duty of care to protect him from alleged sex predator nurse Shane Casey.

Casey, was a nurse who volunteered in his spare time helping his mum, and sleeping over at their house, when the abuse allegedly occurred.

Details of the compensation claim were revealed in a pre-trial decision handed down by Supreme Court Justice Paul Smith on July 15.

Justice Smith declined to strike out the entire claim, as requested by the state, concluding it was open for the man to prove at trial that the state is liable for his loss and damage.

The now 36-year-old has been given the green light to file his eighth attempt at a statement of claim in court.

Justice Smith concluded that it is arguable that the man can prove that Dr McKenna and Mrs Herbert breached their duty of care to him in 1999 by failing to tell his mum that Casey had been sacked from his volunteer job as a parent’s aide by Mrs Herbert in May 1999,

And they also allegedly did not tell his mum that Casey had been sacked from his nursing job at the then-named Royal Childrens Hospital (RCH) in August 1999 after he “actually sexually to a male child who was an inpatient” at RCH.

The man’s statement of claim alleges Mr Casey pleaded guilty to indecent dealing with another child and was convicted of indecently dealing with two other boys, including one who was the man’s brother.

Casey was staying over at the then-10-year-old’s house to help manage the man’s “difficult” sibling, who had attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, the decision states,

Mrs Herbert was the co-ordinator of the “parent aide unit” run from the RCH, which helped parents manage their children, the claim alleges.

It alleges that Dr McKenna, who then worked as a psychologist at the Child and Youth Mental Health Service in Nundah, “recommended to Ms Herbert” that Casey be appointed as a volunteer parent-aide to be assigned to the man’s family.

The claim alleges that Casey’s responsibilities included supporting the man’s mum managing her five kids, “requiring him to be present in the home” in Zillmere in Brisbane’s northern suburbs “and requiring him to interact with” the man’s family.

The state government argued the claim should be struck out because the man alleged he was sexually abused by Casey between June and November 1999, which was after Casey had finished working as a volunteer parent aide in May 1999.

“I do not think … this is a case where the pleading cannot be remedied as it is too confusing. I consider sufficient allegations remain in the pleading to justify a cause of action,” Justice Smith ruled.

He stated that it was still possible that the man could prove at trial that Dr McKenna and Ms Herbert, as agents of the state government, had a duty of care to tell his mum that Casey had been sacked for sexual misconduct with a child at the hospital, so that she could then sack Casey or “stop him from seeing” her son and other kids.

Justice Smith did strike out three paragraphs of the claim.