BRS v Paul Francis Gadd

In assessing damages for historic sexual abuse, the court should evaluate the abuse, resulting psychiatric injury and its effects on education, employment and personal relationships as a whole. The Judicial College Guidelines provide a structured framework, but the appropriate bracket depends on the particular evidence. Serious abuse need not have continued over a prolonged period for a claim to fall within the moderately severe category where the psychiatric injury is severe and prolonged. Injury to feelings may justify a distinct additional award, particularly where there was abuse of trust, exploitation of fame, humiliation or the need to give evidence in criminal and civil proceedings.

The claimant sought damages for sexual abuse committed by the defendant in 1977, when she was aged 12. The defendant was convicted in 2015 of offences arising from the abuse. Judgment in default had been entered, and the hearing concerned assessment of damages. The defendant, although properly served and given an opportunity to participate remotely from prison, did not attend or provide evidence.

The claimant relied on her own evidence and expert psychological evidence diagnosing complex post-traumatic stress disorder and recurrent depressive disorder. The issues included general damages, injury to feelings, loss of earnings, and future psychological treatment.

1. Assessment of general damages. The claim fell within the moderately severe category in the Judicial College Guidelines. The abuse was serious, but had occurred over a period of approximately four months and therefore was not prolonged. The claimant nevertheless suffered severe and prolonged psychiatric injury, with very serious effects on education, work, and personal and sexual relationships. The cautiously optimistic prognosis following EMDR treatment moderated the award. General damages were assessed at £100,000.

2. Injury to feelings. A separate award was appropriate. Relevant features included the nature of the sexual abuse, the defendant’s exploitation of his fame and position of trust, and the claimant’s need to give evidence in the criminal and civil proceedings. Injury to feelings was assessed at £20,000.

3. Loss of earnings. The court accepted that the abuse had prevented the claimant from obtaining meaningful employment. It adopted a broad assessment based on estimated net earnings, allowed for periods when she would probably have been absent from work to raise her children, and applied a 40 per cent discount to reflect the uncertainties and multifactorial nature of the calculation. Loss of earnings was assessed at £381,000.

4. Future treatment. The expert evidence established that EMDR treatment was reasonably required as a consequence of the abuse. The claimant recovered £7,800 for treatment. Her claim for travel expenses was not pursued because treatment could be undertaken remotely.

5. The total damages were assessed at £508,800, comprising £100,000 general damages, £20,000 for injury to feelings, £381,000 for loss of earnings and £7,800 for future treatment. Interest and costs were to be addressed after judgment.