Unrequited Justice: Bishop's Court Rejects AMPLIFIED Compensation Request in Clergy Sex Abuse Case
Court denies elevated compensation for distress and suffering in lawsuit targeting the Bishopric - Court denies increased compensation for suffering
On a grey day in Essen, a court ruling leaves a bitter taste in the mouth
In a shocking rejection, the Regional Court of Essen has denied a man's claim for an additional 300,000 euros in compensation for sexual abuse perpetrated by a Catholic priest over four decades ago. The 16th chamber acknowledged the abuse, yet found that the Diocese of Essen had already paid the plaintiff, Wilfried Fesselmann, 45,000 euros in compensation. The court maintained that no further claim exists.
The verdict, though not final, can still be contestable at the Higher Regional Court in Hamm.
The judge's decision validates claims for material damages resulting from the abuse under the principle of vicarious liability, attributing culpability to the diocese as the priest acted on their behalf. Furthermore, the court stated that the priest's exploitation of his position within the diocese to lure the plaintiff to his home led to the sexual abuse. "This extends to the diocese bearing responsibility for the abuse," the ruling says.
The 45,000 euros compensation sum was deemed fitting, considering the significant limitations imposed on the plaintiff's personal and professional life. The amount echoes comparable decisions made by other courts.
The civil lawsuit involved explicit acts of sexual abuse by a former Essen priest in 1979. The now ex-clergyman admitted to lying naked in bed with the boy, attempting to touch him intimately. However, the court deemed the clergyman's account questionable, as it contrasted with the plaintiff's account of experiencing oral sex at the age of 11.
Criminal prosecution was not pursued as the act is now statute-barred.
A Twisted Transition
The Essen priest was transferred to Bavaria in the early 1980s, following allegations of multiple abuse cases. Despite relocation, the abuse continued, according to the Diocese of Essen, leading to numerous convictions. He was finally removed from church service in 2010 and later laicized, forfeiting his church pension.
- Abuse Victim
- Essen
- Diocese
- Catholic Church
- Regional Court
- Hamm
- Higher Regional Court of Hamm
Seeking a New Path to Justice
Civil lawsuits in Germany typically involve an initial filing at a local district court (Landgericht), with the potential for the case to be elevated to a higher court if it involves substantial financial claims or complexity. The plaintiff must present evidence and legal arguments to support their claim. If either party disputes the judgment, they may appeal to the next higher court.
In cases of clergy abuse, the statute of limitations for personal injury claims is generally three years from the time of injury or the discovery of the injury. There can be flexibility in applying these rules when dealing with child abuse or severe traumas. Evidence collection can be challenging due to the passage of time and the nature of the allegations, so courts may consider psychological assessments, witness testimonies, and other forms of evidence.
Investigating specific cases or appeals at the Higher Regional Court of Hamm would necessitate consulting German legal databases or reaching out to legal professionals knowledgeable about such proceedings in Germany.
- The Regional Court of Essen has denied an additional compensation request for damages caused by sexual abuse, citing previous compensation payment to the plaintiff.
- The judge validated claims for material damages under the principle of vicarious liability, attributing culpability to the Diocese of Essen.
- The Diocese of Essen acknowledged previous acts of sexual abuse by a former Essen priest, leading to numerous convictions and his subsequent removal from church service.
- The plaintiff may contest the verdict at the Higher Regional Court in Hamm, potentially elevating the case due to its substantial financial claims or complexity.