A woman who, from the age of 12, was repeatedly sexually assaulted and abused has been awarded €600,000 damages against a Co Wexford publican by a jury at the High Court.
The man in question, who was a friend of the family and is now in prison, had admitted the abuse. The jury was asked to assess damages for the woman, now in her 20s.
The award is believed to be the highest made to date by a High Court jury, and the action is one of the first of its kind.
The assaults took place between 1990 and 1995, when the plaintiff was aged 12 to 17. The court heard the victim was too frightened until 1997 to speak out about the abuse, fearing it would cause terrible trouble for her family and the man's family.
The abuse, said Mr Turlough O'Donnell SC, for the plaintiff, had caused the victim trauma during her childhood, adolescence and adult life.
The plaintiff's family and the man's family were friends and used to visit each other regularly. The plaintiff lived in Dublin and the man, now serving a jail sentence imposed in June 2002, lived in Co Wexford, where he ran a public house and retail premises. The abuse took place at the man's premises and at the girl's home.
The man, who was represented by a full legal team at yesterday's hearing, was sentenced in 2002 to eight years on a number of counts of sexual abuse against four girls, including the plaintiff in the present case. Two years of that term were suspended.
Mr Justice Kearns and the jury were told that the man had admitted sexually abusing the plaintiff between 1990 and 1995, and that the only issue to be decided was the amount of damages.
The jury of seven men and five women brought in its decision on damages after an absence of 45 minutes. An application for a stay on the order for damages was adjourned until Friday, when costs will also be dealt with.
Mr O'Donnell said the woman was entitled to damages for what happened and was also entitled to have her voice heard. She had not had a voice during the years of abuse and it was important that she would speak to a jury of her peers and explain what happened.
During those years, the plaintiff could not speak to her parents about what was happening. Sometimes she was "in another world" and would detach herself from what was going on. That was the fear of a young child and adolescent. She feared she would cause terrible problems for the two families if she spoke.
However, in 1997, she finally spoke about the issues.
The plaintiff had suffered injuries as a result of what had occurred.
The medical language could not contain the horror of what had happened.
She suffered depression, post-traumatic stress, low self-esteem and self-loathing. She had difficulty in concentrating. She was making progress and took every day as it came.
In evidence, the plaintiff said there were various reasons why she did not consider telling her parents or any other adult about what was happening. At the start, she did not even understand what was happening.
She went off into "another little world". She did not think she would be believed.
She said that she had had nightmares and was screaming in her sleep. She would be afraid to go asleep and would stay awake at night. She had since completed secondary school and gone to university where she obtained a degree.
A GP, in evidence, said he first became aware of the victim's sexual abuse in early 1998. She and her family were very distressed. The disclosure about what had happened was quite fresh at the time. The victim had flashbacks and nightmares over a period.
She suffered depression, sleep disorder, self-loathing and unworthiness.
A consultant psychiatrist, Dr Louis O'Connell, said he first saw the plaintiff in April 2003 and again saw her in November last. Her depression had responded to treatment and her mood had improved. She would continue to need anti-depressant treatment. She would continue to have significant emotional and physical difficulty, he said.
In cross-examination by Mr Aidan Walsh SC, for the accused, Dr O'Connell said the court case was a big issue and getting closure on it would be of benefit to the plaintiff.