Child Sex abuse lawsuit

Remove this Banner Ad

Cadillac

Cadillac

Norm Smith Medallist
Veteran
Mar 25, 2016
6,057
14,326
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
What is the latest update on the clubs $6 million fine? Is anyone worried about how the club can afford to pay such a significant fine? I haven’t heard any updates on this. Has anyone heard anything? I really worry how we come out the other side of this.

It seems like over the last few years we have finally started making profits as a footy club and then we get such a significant fine like this, to hit the club like a sledgehammer that is out of the clubs control. I definitely feel bad for the victim. But how can the club be found guilty of this?
 
stefoid said:
The same way Hardie is still culpable for asbestos.

Mistakes were made - we have to cop it on the chin and move on.
Click to expand...
Hardie made a product that was harmful.
The Footscray Football didn’t do such a thing, they are not ‘culpable’. Some horrible person who volunteered there was/is. The level of ‘culpability’ is to be defended. How much, if anything, was known and not acted upon is the level of culpability, and that deserves the punishment, but the club is not culpable, the offender is. So far the level of punishment far outweighs any culpability and deflects to the wrong party.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Freshwater said:
Hardie made a product that was harmful.
The Footscray Football didn’t do such a thing, they are not ‘culpable’. Some horrible person who volunteered there was/is. The level of ‘culpability’ is to be defended. How much, if anything, was known and not acted upon is the level of culpability, and that deserves the punishment, but the club is not culpable, the offender is. So far the level of punishment far outweighs any culpability and deflects to the wrong party.
Click to expand...

Oh for sure if they are not culpable. I thought Cadillac meant 'how can the club be responsible today when nobody involved is at the club any more?'

I dont know the details of the case at all, but the club was found culpable by those that do, so... what else can we say?

In principle, we all want to be able to send our kids to organizations such as footy clubs, scouts and so on, with the assurance that the adults those organizations have around the kids arent pedophiles, right? There is a duty of care.

I realize 'duty of care' isnt a concept that had any traction in the 80s, particularly in an environment like a suburban footy club. I guess it depends on if you think "what do you expect, it was the 80s" is a reasonable excuse.

very murky waters
 
I believe the level of damages was determined by the jury. This is a new "initiative" brought it by the State Labor Government. Because of the obvious significant trauma suffered by the victim, it is understandable that lay people can have a powerfully emotional response to "make right" without balancing out the culpability of or impact on the defendant.

I would hope this gets addressed through the appeal process.

We are becoming a very litigious society. We need to push back on this. It is starting to get out of control
 
The club may be making a proportionality case. That is, we accept a measure of culpability but for various reasons the judgement against the club is disproportionate.

As the previous post pointed out it’s the first time a lay jury has determined the level of damages and that process is possibly flawed or needs moderating. It’s been stated that the damages are way beyond anything previously awarded.
 
To me, it is wild that a jury has that power. We are getting to the point where the jury is the judge (deciding punishment) and jury.. how long til they become the executioner as well...
 
Pugz89 said:
I am well aware capital punishment is not something we do in Australia. I was using the judge, jury and executioner quote to illustrate my point.
Click to expand...
What/who is the "executioner" in your metaphor? I don't understand what point you're making with that comment? Explain it to me like I'm stupid.
 
BEaston said:
What/who is the "executioner" in your metaphor? I don't understand what point you're making with that comment? Explain it to me like I'm stupid.
Click to expand...
So, for as long as I have known, the jury is the jury and only the jury (decides guilty/not guilty) and nobody expected them to have the scope expanded. Now it has expanded to also being the judge (decides penalty if there is a guilty finding). The executioner part is part of the quote, as without it I don't think people would have understood the quote I was referencing.
 
I know we are appealing but these things usually take years don't they?
 
Cudi said:
I know we are appealing but these things usually take years don't they?
Click to expand...
Probably. It will sit on the balance sheet as a contingent liability until it's settled.

Obviously we all want as much justice as possible for the victim but given we have several high profile lawyers deeply connected to the club, I'm sure we would be exhausting all avenues at reducing the penalty to a reasonable amount.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Pugz89 said:
So, for as long as I have known, the jury is the jury and only the jury (decides guilty/not guilty) and nobody expected them to have the scope expanded. Now it has expanded to also being the judge (decides penalty if there is a guilty finding). The executioner part is part of the quote, as without it I don't think people would have understood the quote I was referencing.
Click to expand...

I’m getting the impression there’s some misinfo going around because the role of juries hasn’t changed.
 
a few things about this case. Kneale's action in the Court sought damages for a breach of the club's duty of care under the doctrine of vicarious liability.

  1. Ultimately, the question for the Court became whether Hobbs’ role met the elements of the criteria that would give rise to a claim of vicarious liability – that being, whether Hobbs’ volunteer role gave him authority, power, trust, control and the ability to achieve intimacy with the victim.
  2. As a matter of law, the Court did not consider vicarious liability attached to the “sporting club-volunteer” relationship. It distinguished Bird's “diocese-priest” relationship from the “sporting club-volunteer” relationship present on the facts.
  3. The Court ultimately found three reasons why the Club was not vicariously liable for Hobbs’s wrongdoing.


On the above it's probable that the club wouldnt have been seen as breaching a duty of care, not going to go into lengths here as it takes too long to document but relates to the case law argued before the Court which didnt support Kneale's basis.

However...

The Judges comments in the Court transcript state the following

  1. After hearing that argument, I indicated that I would instruct the jury that the defendant admitted a duty of care in the terms set out in paragraph 11(a) of the defence. Accordingly, I charged the jury as follows:[73]
In this case the Club admits that in the period 1983 to 1991 it owed a duty to take reasonable care to avoid foreseeable risks of injury of which it knew or ought to have been aware to persons who attended the Club’s premises at the Western Oval.
The relevant risk of injury in this case was the risk of a child spectator such as Mr Kneale being sexually abused by Graeme Hobbs. Mr Kneale says that the Club ought to have known of this risk, and that it was reasonably foreseeable. The Club denies this, and this is the critical issue for you, really.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Damages Assessed​

The Plaintiff was awarded judgment for approximately $5,940,000, broken down as follows:
(a) $3,250,000 for pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life;
(b) $2,605,578 for past loss of earnings and loss of earning capacity; and
(c) $87,573 for future medical and related expenses


The purpose of an award of damages isto compensate the plaintiff for the wrong they have suffered. Where that wrongis a tort,damages are to be assessed so as to put the plaintiff in the positionthey would have occupied had the tort not been committed. In Haines vBendall,[57] a majority of theHigh Court said:[58]


The settled principle governing the assessment of compensatory damages, whether in actions of tort or contract, is that the injured party should receive compensation in a sum which, so far as money can do, will put that party in the same position as he or she would have been in if the contract had been performed or the tort had not been committed: ... Compensation is the cardinal concept. It is the “one principle that is absolutely firm, and which must control all else”: .... Cognate with this concept is the rule ... that a plaintiff cannot recover more than he or she has lost.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

In this case, Mr Kneale’s economic loss extended back more than 30 years, and included a period between 1993 and 2000 when he was unable to work at all. Indexation of those losses to counter the effects of inflation achieved the purpose of compensation,while ignoring those effects would not have put Mr Kneale in the position he would have been in had his earning capacity not been impaired by the Club’s negligence and Hobbs’ abuse.

61 For those reasons, I ruled that past loss of earnings should be indexed for inflation, so that damages assessed in today’s money would reflect the value of past losses, and instructed the jury on that basis.


Discount for future losses

62 Mr Thompson was instructed to discount future losses at the rate of 3%. Ms Bowman calculated future losses by applying two alternative discount rates, of 3% and5%.

63 A discount rate of 5% must be applied to an award of damages for future economic loss to which Pt VB of the WrongsAct 1958 (Vic)applies.[60] It was common ground that, if Pt VB of the Wrongs Act did not apply, the appropriate discount ratewas3%.[61]


Might be difficult to appeal the compensation awarded, there may be a challenge for part A of the compensation.
 
The largest payout to an abuse survivor in Australia, a $5.9 million award against the Western Bulldogs, has been reduced by more than half on appeal.
But lawyers for Adam Kneale, who was abused by volunteer Graeme Hobbs, have hailed the revised $2.6 million pay out as a win because the Court of Appeal rejected the rest of the AFL club's claims.
"My client's delighted that the Court of Appeal has upheld the win," Rightside Legal's Michael Magazanik said outside court on Thursday.
"What this judgment underlines is that the Western Bulldogs allowed a pedophile to freely roam the premises, groom kids, abuse kids and destroy lives, and now the Bulldogs are going to pay a hefty price for that failure."
Following a four-week Supreme Court trial, a jury of six found the Bulldogs were negligent and awarded $5,943,151 in damages, including $3,250,000 for Mr Kneale's pain and suffering.
The Bulldogs launched an appeal against the jury's finding, asking for it to be overturned and also appealed the award amount.
Their lawyers argued "red flags" reported to the club's leadership about Hobbs, including that he was "sleazy character"in a trench coat, were not evidence enough to prove he would go onto commit child sexual abuse.
But the Court of Appeal struck out all of the Bulldog's appeal claims except one on Thursday.
They allowed their appeal against the jury's pain and suffering amount to be overturned and reduced Mr Kneale's payout to $2,637,573.
Bulldogs barrister Geraldine Gray asked the judges to allow the club 28 days to pay out the amount.
The court also ordered the Melbourne-based club to pay 70 per cent of their appeal costs.
Mr Magazanik said Mr Kneale expected some reduction as the $5.9 million jury amount was higher than his lawyers had asked for during the trial.
He said the Bulldogs had fought "tooth and nail to avoid paying Adam Kneale a single cent".
"The general damages figure is now $850,000 which is still the highest figure awarded in Australian legal history for a survivor of sexual abuse," he said.
www.standard.net.au

Biggest abuse survivor payout reduced by more than half

Lawyers for an abuse survivor say an appeal court's decision to uphold a jury finding against the Western...
www.standard.net.au www.standard.net.au
 
I hope we don't appeal any further. Pay the man.
 
Pugz89 said:
The largest payout to an abuse survivor in Australia, a $5.9 million award against the Western Bulldogs, has been reduced by more than half on appeal.
But lawyers for Adam Kneale, who was abused by volunteer Graeme Hobbs, have hailed the revised $2.6 million pay out as a win because the Court of Appeal rejected the rest of the AFL club's claims.
"My client's delighted that the Court of Appeal has upheld the win," Rightside Legal's Michael Magazanik said outside court on Thursday.
"What this judgment underlines is that the Western Bulldogs allowed a pedophile to freely roam the premises, groom kids, abuse kids and destroy lives, and now the Bulldogs are going to pay a hefty price for that failure."
Following a four-week Supreme Court trial, a jury of six found the Bulldogs were negligent and awarded $5,943,151 in damages, including $3,250,000 for Mr Kneale's pain and suffering.
The Bulldogs launched an appeal against the jury's finding, asking for it to be overturned and also appealed the award amount.
Their lawyers argued "red flags" reported to the club's leadership about Hobbs, including that he was "sleazy character"in a trench coat, were not evidence enough to prove he would go onto commit child sexual abuse.
But the Court of Appeal struck out all of the Bulldog's appeal claims except one on Thursday.
They allowed their appeal against the jury's pain and suffering amount to be overturned and reduced Mr Kneale's payout to $2,637,573.
Bulldogs barrister Geraldine Gray asked the judges to allow the club 28 days to pay out the amount.
The court also ordered the Melbourne-based club to pay 70 per cent of their appeal costs.
Mr Magazanik said Mr Kneale expected some reduction as the $5.9 million jury amount was higher than his lawyers had asked for during the trial.
He said the Bulldogs had fought "tooth and nail to avoid paying Adam Kneale a single cent".
"The general damages figure is now $850,000 which is still the highest figure awarded in Australian legal history for a survivor of sexual abuse," he said.
www.standard.net.au

Biggest abuse survivor payout reduced by more than half

Lawyers for an abuse survivor say an appeal court's decision to uphold a jury finding against the Western...
www.standard.net.au www.standard.net.au
Click to expand...

Good result for all concerned. The plaintiff lawyer should just cool his jets with the clips at the club though.
 
Yep, pay that amount and move on. It's a substantial sum but we're clearly now in a position to deal with that financially and not do any long term damage.

Although I did hear rumblings a while back that there could be other possible victims in relation to the same employee?
 
TiAn_ said:
Good result for all concerned. The plaintiff lawyer should just cool his jets with the clips at the club though.
Click to expand...
Dog whistle for more claims.
 
Is there any way that all members or supporters can chip in an additional for $50 so that the club is back on track?

I wonder what palatable way we could do this without being accused of supporting a culpable organisation? Upgrading one’s membership? Any suggestions.

To be clear I feel empathy for that man and want him to have that money, but I also want to ensure our club remains in a healthy financial state.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Child Sex abuse lawsuit

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top