O'Connor v Trustees of the Christian Brothers

In the Supreme Court of Victoria, O'Connor sought to set aside a settlement deed with the Trustees of the Christian Brothers, following an alleged historical child sexual abuse. The plaintiff argued that the deed was not just and reasonable due to the impact of the Ellis defence and other risk factors on his decision-making process. The Trustees opposed the application, asserting that the settlement deed should stand as it was, and that the plaintiff's decision to settle was not materially impacted by the Ellis defence or other risk factors.

The court was required to determine whether the settlement deed should be set aside under the Limitation of Actions Act 1958 (Vic). This involved interpreting the meaning of the Ellis defence and its impact on the plaintiff’s decision to settle, as well as considering other risk factors that may have influenced the settlement process. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the Legal Identity of Defendants (Organisational Child Abuse) Act 2018 (Vic) provided any relevant context or guidance on these issues.

The court found that the plaintiff’s decision to enter into the settlement deed was not materially impacted by the Ellis defence or other risk factors. It concluded that there were no grounds to set aside the settlement deed under the Limitation of Actions Act 1958 (Vic). The court reasoned that the plaintiff's decision to settle was not influenced in a way that would render the settlement unjust or unreasonable. The court also considered relevant precedents, including Trustees of the Christian Brothers v DZY and O’Connor v Comensoli, to support its decision.

The court ordered that the application to set aside the settlement deed be dismissed. The Trustees of the Christian Brothers were granted costs of the proceedings.