Child sex victim fails to reopen damages claim against elite school

Calls are being made to urgently fix ‘flawed’ legislation, after a man who was abused by notorious paedophile Kevin Lynch lost his last-ditch bid to reopen a damages claim against Brisbane Grammar School.

The State Government is being pressured to urgently fix “flawed” legislation that makes it almost impossible for victims of historical child sex abuse to receive fair compensation.

It comes after a survivor of horrific abuse by paedophile counsellor Kevin Lynch lost his last-ditch bid to reopen a damages claim against Brisbane Grammar School.

The man’s lawyers said ill-defined terms in amendments to legislation made in response to the Royal Commission into Institutional Response to Child Sexual Abuse meant respondents could be favoured over victims.

The man, known as TRG, was abused at least six times as a 12 and 13-year-old student at Brisbane’s most prestigious boys’ school in the 1980s.

On May 20, the High Court of Australia rejected TRG’s appeal of a Supreme Court ruling that prevented him fighting for a higher payout than his earlier 2002 settlement of $47,000.

TRG was the first Lynch victim to test the 2016 amendment to the Limitation of Actions Act (Qld), which states a court can set aside previous settlements to permit new claims if it decides it is “just and reasonable to do so”.

Brisbane Grammar School is facing a $30 million lawsuit from a former student over claims he was abused there as a teenager.

TRG’s lawyers, who said their client was “recovering from the High Court findings”, said the Government’s failure to define “just and reasonable” left the words open to broad interpretation that could disadvantage victims.

Peter Wilkinson, McNamara Law managing director, called on Attorney-General Shannon Fentiman to clarify the phrase.

“We believe Parliament’s intention was to benefit victims but without defining that phrase we can’t see how a case will ever get around it,” Mr Wilkinson said.

Joshua Brown, senior associate at McNamara Law, said TRG’s case was submitted to the High Court as “a clear injustice”.

“But all a respondent needs to say is this all happened 30 years ago and it creates a prejudiced defence,” Mr Brown said.

He said the High Court finding “demonstrates the underlying flaw and failure in the Queensland legislation”.

The Brisbane Grammar board of trustees submitted to the High Court that the school would suffer prejudice – that would not be “just and reasonable” – if TRG’s settlement agreement was set aside.

This was based on issues relating to the credibility of former headmaster Max Howell, who swore an affidavit in 2002 denying he knew of Lynch’s abuse.

Dr Howell, who died in 2011, was unavailable to test evidence referred to in the Royal Commission in which witnesses said he had explicitly been told of the abuse as early as 1980.

David Welsh is launching a $30 million lawsuit against Brisbane Grammar School. Picture: Adam Head

Brisbane Grammar School is also facing a $30 million lawsuit from David Welsh, who was abused by Kevin Lynch as a 15-year-old boy in 1985.

Commenting on the TRG case, headmaster Anthony Micallef said: “We acknowledge the decision of the High Court in this matter”.

“Since 2000, the school has openly acknowledged the abuse that occurred and the harm caused as a result,” Mr Micallef said.

“The school has worked to support those coming forward since that time, providing compensation, ongoing counselling, a direct personal response and other support.

“The school is committed to continuing to resolve matters with those who have experienced abuse, either directly or through the National Redress Scheme.”

A spokesperson for acting Attorney-General Mark Ryan said the 2016 amendments were introduced by the LNP.

“This Government will always put victims first, that’s why the Attorney-General has requested departmental advice about this matter.”