A father has applied for the directors of the Cari (Children at Risk in Ireland) Foundation to be brought before the High Court to explain their alleged failure to obey court orders requiring the production of documents relating to how it investigated "unfounded" allegations made in 1995 that he sexually abused his three-year-old daughter.
The man has claimed that the foundation, a voluntary organisation to assist child sex abuse victims, subjected his daughter to 23 therapy sessions from 1995 without any prior investigation into whether or not the alleged abuse had occurred.
He has brought a High Court claim alleging negligence against the Cari Foundation, Clarecare and the Mid-Western Health Board arising from the manner in which allegations of sexual abuse, which the man claims are unfounded, were investigated. All the defendants have denied the claims.
The full case has yet to be heard but, in preliminary procedural applications, the man secured orders from the Master of the High Court requiring Cari to discover any documents relating to the investigation.
He also secured orders requiring Cari to discover documents related to Cari's counselling of his daughter and her mother, the man's estranged partner.
Orders were also made requiring Cari to discover all guidelines, practice statements and similar documents in Cari's possession in March 1995 issued by the Department of Health or the Mid-Western Health Board in relation to the sexual abuse of children. Because of alleged breaches of those discovery orders, he subsequently brought a motion for the attachment and committal of five directors of Cari. That motion was briefly mentioned before Mr Justice Kevin Feeney yesterday and was adjourned on consent for three weeks.
The order for discovery of the documents was made in March 2004 and was served on solicitors for Cari in April 2004. The time limited for making discovery expired on May 21st 2004 but discovery was not made by then, it is contended.
That led to an application to have Cari's defence to the proceedings struck out because of the alleged failure to make discovery. On March 3rd, 2005, the Master of the High Court made an order striking out the defence of Cari.
The action is continuing in relation to the remaining defendants. The man claims he requires the Cari documents for prosecution of his claim against those and also for an assessment of damages against Cari.
However, it is alleged, Cari has still failed to make discovery and, in those circumstances, the man is seeking to have the directors brought before the court to explain that failure.
