GLJ v The Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Lismore

The appellant, GLJ, commenced proceedings in the Supreme Court of New South Wales against the Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Lismore, alleging sexual abuse by a priest in 1968. Despite the absence of a limitation period for child sexual abuse claims under section 6A of the *Limitation Act 1969* (NSW), the respondent sought a permanent stay of proceedings, arguing that the death of the alleged perpetrator and other witnesses rendered a fair trial impossible, thus constituting an abuse of process. The High Court of Australia considered the appeal from the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The central legal issues before the High Court were whether the death of critical witnesses and the passage of time constituted exceptional circumstances such that a trial would be necessarily unfair, justifying a permanent stay of proceedings as an abuse of process. The Court also considered the applicable standard of appellate review for decisions concerning abuse of process, specifically whether the "correctness standard" from *Warren v Coombes* applied, or if the matter involved an exercise of discretion reviewable under the principles in *House v King*.

The High Court reasoned that while section 6A of the *Limitation Act 1969* (NSW) removed the temporal bar to bringing claims for child sexual abuse, it did not alter the fundamental principles governing abuse of process. The Court noted that the respondent's case for a stay was based solely on the alleged necessary unfairness of a trial, not on undue oppression or other forms of unfairness. Drawing on precedent, the Court held that the absence of a limitation period does not automatically preclude a finding of abuse of process, nor does it mandate a stay if a fair trial remains possible. The Court concluded that the respondent had not demonstrated that a trial would be necessarily unfair to the extent required to justify a permanent stay.

The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the orders of the Court of Appeal and dismissing the respondent's application for a permanent stay. The proceedings were therefore remitted for trial.