The indemnity for religious congregations agreed with the State in the compensation scheme for victims of abuse will not be reviewed.
The Minister for Education, Mr Dempsey, told the Dáil that the indemnity agreement "contains all the essential points of a legally-binding contract".
He said: "There is no provision for renegotiation in the indemnity agreement and there are therefore no plans to review it."
All legal considerations were taken account of during the negotiation period and during the final drafting of the indemnity.
Mr Dempsey was responding to Labour's Education spokeswoman, Ms Jan O'Sullivan, during Question Time.
The indemnity was part of an agreement reached between the State and the Congregration of Religious Institutions (CORI) for compensation for victims of abuse in residential institutions. The scheme will be operated by a specially-established body, the Religious Institutions Redress Board.
Ms O'Sullivan, who sought details of the negotiations, wanted to know how the final estimate in compensation costs was accepted as €500 million and if there was an assessment.
"Was the amount based on cases that would go to the redress board, or was it done on the basis of cases that would go to court?" she asked. "Did they get specific legal advice on the likely cost of court cases?"
Mr Dempsey said that the €250 million to €500 million was the Department of Education's then "best-guess estimate of the total cost, whether it was through the courts or redress board".
The full costs of compensation are unlikely to be known for another three years.
Asked if the State would be responsible for all costs if a court assessed major culpability on the religious institutions, Mr Dempsey said that "the legal indemnity given to the religious orders only covers cases that could be heard before the Redress Board".
If the victim decides instead to go for a court hearing the case has to be commenced within six years of the indemnity.
Mr Dempsey pointed out that in the ongoing discussions on property, if they could not get agreement on the exchange of buildings the State would get cash instead.
He also promised that documents on the property negotiations would be made available when the negotiations were concluded. Access to certain documentation, applied for under the Freedom of Information Act, was refused. The refusal was appealed and the Department was considering the issue under the "internal review provisions" of the Act.
However, a certain amount of the refused documentation related to the property aspects of the agreement with CORI.
The negotiations were ongoing with CORI's legal representatives.
