Our attention has been drawn to an interesting case which was heard in the Scottish Court of Session in June 2005 concerning a claim by made former residents of Nazareth House. The case is particularly interesting in that it raises legal questions about compensation cases being time barred, and about recovered memories. It also significant because it connects cases in Scotland, Australia, North Wales and England.
The case is known as A S or B (AP) and D M J P or W Sister Bernard Mary Murray and Others [2005]CSOH 70
The case concludes with these remarks:
For the reasons stated above I will exercise my discretion under section 19A in favour of the defenders and refuse to allow the pursuers to bring the present actions. I reach this conclusion without hesitation. It seems to me that the two principal reasons for my decision, the length of time that has elapsed since the events complained of and the actual prejudice that has been demonstrated by the defenders, are both extremely powerful. I would regard either of those reasons by itself as sufficient to refuse to allow the actions to proceed. In addition, it was clear during their evidence that the raising of these actions has caused considerable distress to all three pursuers. That is entirely understandable; it is clearly most upsetting for anyone to have to think in detail about unhappy memories of childhood. I cannot think that it is genuinely in the pursuers' interests to rake over those memories, especially where the individual nuns that are said to have been responsible are either dead or elderly. The care of children has moved on in the last 25 years, and institutions such as Nazareth House no longer exist. To that extent the pursuers' complaints have been vindicated. That may give them some comfort.