| Case-Name: | Doe v Bennett |
| Heard-Date: | January 14, 2004 |
| Decided-Date: | March 25, 2004 |
| Citations: | 2004 SCC 17, [2004] 1 S.C.R. 436 |
| Docket: | 29426 |
| Scc: | 2003-2004 |
| Unanimous: | Beverley McLachlin C.F. |
| Lawsapplied: | Bazley v Curry, [1999] 2 SCR 534; Jacobi v Griffiths, [1999] 2 SCR 570; KLB v British Columbia, 2003 SCC 51, [2003] 2 SCR 403 |
| Ruling: | The Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of St. George's (a corporation sole occupied by the bishop) is directly and vicariously liable for sexual abuse by Bennett, a priest in its diocese. The court declines to address the question of whether the Roman Catholic Church can be held liable. |
Doe v Bennett, 2004 SCC 17 is a legal ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada which upheld the lower court's decision that the ecclesiastical corporation, Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of St. George's in Western Newfoundland, was vicariously liable (as well as directly liable) for sexual abuse by Father Kevin Bennett.[1]
The Court concluded that the ecclesiastical corporation's secondary responsibility originates from the power and authority over parishioners that the Church gave to its priests.[2] [3] The facts satisfied the close connection test: "the evidence overwhelmingly satisfies the tests affirmed in Bazley, Jacobi and KLB The relationship between the diocesan enterprise and Bennett was sufficiently close."[4] It asserted that:
The Court declined to address the "difficult question of whether the Roman Catholic Church can be held liable in a case such as this."[5]