Child sex victim to pay

Mark Oberhardt

January 09, 2007 11:00pm

A CHILD sex victim is faced with a hefty legal bill after she failed to win an extension of time in which she could sue her molester.

The woman is the latest in a string of child sex victims to have gone to the District Court seeking an extension of the limitation period in which to bring the civil action.

Applications have involved judges reviewing the Limitation of Actions Act 1974 and there have been widely varying results.

The woman, who cannot be identified, was molested by a family member from the time she was three until aged about 12, between April 1981 and December 1990.

She did not complain to police until 1995 and the man who molested her eventually pleaded guilty to seven charges of indecent dealing.

The limitation period for her to bring an action expired in 1999 and she sought an extension on the basis she had a "material fact of a decisive nature" which she had not known until a year before the claim was filed in August last year.

The "decisive fact" was an assessment she was suffering a psychiatric condition as a result of being molested.

Although admitting he had molested her, the man denied he had caused her any injury and argued the action was barred under relevant legislation.

In a written judgment, which became available yesterday, Judge John McGill refused to extend the limitation period.

He found the woman knew what the man had done to her and knew the symptoms she suffered.

Judge McGill said that if it wasn't for the limitation argument, the woman had a right of action as there was no dispute that she was molested.

He said if there was a trial the point to argue would be quantum of any damages paid to her.

Judge McGill dismissed the woman's action and ordered she pay the defendant's costs.