Canadian Lawyer

January 2010

The most widely read magazine for Canadian lawyers

Issue link: https://digital.canadianlawyermag.com/i/50817

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 32 of 47

trauma of their abuse, may not be ready to come forward, and others who may not yet have connected the dots between the abuse they suf- fered and its impact on their lives. "The child that was abused two years ago, or the individual that may have been abused 15 years ago . . . these victims take years to make the connection between their emotional stress and the abuse that occurred many years ago," says Ledroit. "This is a very, very dangerous precedent. Any diocese in the world can now say, 'Look, we'll make a deal with you. We'll put up X number of dollars and we'll enter into a class action. But after that, nobody can ever come after us again.'" McKiggan says if Ledroit has clients, such as Latimer, who aren't ready to come forward yet, all they have to do is formally opt out of the settlement to preserve their right to sue privately in the future. He also believes it's "naive" to think there may be people, victimized years ago, who aren't aware that they have a legal claim against the diocese. As for children, he says the settlement exempts people who are either minors today, or are disabled, from its opt-out deadlines. Ledroit's preference for a more public, adversarial process may work for some sex abuse survivors, but not many, says McKiggan. "Paul's view is the best way to resolve these things is public litigation, press confer- ences, and scorched earth," he says. "My view is there are few sexual abuse survivors who are capable of doing it that way. "So a process that does this confidentially, privately, in a safe envi- ronment, and a non-adversarial fashion — for the vast majority of sexual abuse survivors, that's the appropriate way to go. And I think my view has been validated by the fact that we've been contacted by more than 100 people looking for information about this." Says Ledroit: "McKiggan has a valid argument that this is the best way to get money to the people, and the cheapest way to resolve it. But at what cost? At the cost of an artificial limitation period? Who speaks for those victims that can't come forward now?" McKiggan admits he is concerned about the problems that have envel- oped the settlement since it was approved by the court in September. A new bishop — Brian Dunn, from the Diocese of Sault Ste. Marie, Ont. — was appointed in November by the Vatican to lead the beleaguered Diocese of Antigonish. At first, it was unclear what his views on the settlement were, and whether he would honour it. Latimer's decision to opt out of the agreement gives the diocese the right to withdraw. "I am worried about it," says McKiggan. "But if either party pulls out and the class action dissolves, then I will have 100 clients who will pursue individual litigation. That is what we will do." In December, however, MacIntosh, the diocese's lawyer, announced publicly that the diocese wished to proceed with the class action, allay- ing some of McKiggan's fears. MacIntosh says the tangled and unex- pected fallout from Lahey's criminal charges shouldn't tarnish what he considers an honourable and innovative legal solution for the diocese and its victims. "While former Bishop Lahey played a prominent role in the success of the settlement agreement, his subsequent fall from grace should not be used as a measure of the deal itself," says MacIntosh. "The other parties involved, and Ron Martin in particular, deserve better than that." www. CA NADIAN Law ye rmag.com JANU AR Y 2010 33 ntitled-1 1 12/8/09 2:56:18 PM

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Canadian Lawyer - January 2010