Church Abuse Compensation : Koffels Solicitors and Barristers

Civil compensation claims for survivors of clergy and religious order abuse

If you were sexually abused as a child in a church, a religious school, or an institution run by a religious order, you may be entitled to civil compensation. Koffels Solicitors & Barristers has acted for survivors of church and clergy abuse across Australia since 2010, in claims against Catholic dioceses, the Marist Brothers, the De La Salle Brothers, the Christian Brothers, and many other religious organisations.

Initial consultations are free and confidential. Call 02 9283 5599 or use the contact form below.

What is church abuse compensation?

Church abuse compensation is civil compensation paid by a religious institution that failed to protect a child in its care from sexual abuse. It is usually paid by the institution, not the individual offender, because the claim rests on the institution’s own legal responsibility for the priests, brothers, teachers, and other people it placed in contact with children.

Civil compensation is assessed on your individual circumstances. It can include damages for pain and suffering, psychological injury, past and future loss of earnings, and past and future treatment costs. There is no cap on civil compensation, although in NSW the Civil Liability Act 2002 rules on how damages are calculated can apply.

How institutions are held liable

A religious institution can be held legally responsible for child sexual abuse in three main ways. Which applies depends on the facts, including who the offender was and how the institution was involved with the child.

Ways a religious institution can be held liable for child sexual abuse
Basis of liability	What it means	Where the law stands
Non-delegable duty of care	An institution that took on the care, supervision, or control of a child owed that child a duty that it could not hand off to someone else. Abuse by the person it entrusted with the child can breach that duty.	Confirmed by the High Court in AA v The Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Maitland-Newcastle [2026] HCA 2, in which Koffels acted for the survivor.
Vicarious liability	An employer can be liable for wrongs committed by its employees in the course of their role.	Narrowed by the High Court in Bird v DP (2024): at common law it generally requires an employment relationship, so it may not reach priests or members of religious orders. Some states and territories have legislated to change this.
Negligence (systemic failure)	An institution that knew, or should have known, of the risk and failed to act can be liable for its own negligence, for example by moving offenders between parishes or schools, concealing complaints, or failing to supervise.	Long established. Depends on the evidence of what the institution knew and did.

AA v Maitland-Newcastle: what the High Court decided

On 11 February 2026, a majority of the High Court of Australia held that the Diocese of Maitland-Newcastle owed AA, who was abused by a priest of the Diocese in 1969, a non-delegable duty of care, and that the priest’s intentional abuse breached that duty. In doing so, the Court overturned the earlier position from New South Wales v Lepore (2003) that intentional criminal conduct could not breach a non-delegable duty. The Court also held that the NSW Civil Liability Act limits on damages applied to the claim.

The decision matters because it gives survivors a route to compensation that does not depend on the offender being an employee, after Bird v DP closed off vicarious liability in many church cases. Koffels represented AA throughout, and Principal Ross Koffel led the case in the High Court. Read more about the High Court’s decision in AA v Maitland-Newcastle and how the ACT has responded to Bird v DP.

For more on how institutional liability developed after the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, see our Royal Commission guide.

Religious institutions Koffels has acted against

Koffels has acted for survivors in matters involving a wide range of Catholic and non-Catholic religious institutions across Australia, including:

Catholic dioceses and archdioceses, including the Diocese of Maitland-Newcastle, the Diocese of Lismore, the Diocese of Wollongong, the Diocese of Ballarat, and the Archdiocese of Melbourne.

Religious orders, including the Marist Brothers, the De La Salle Brothers, the Christian Brothers, the Salesians of Don Bosco, the Patrician Brothers, the Sisters of St Joseph, and the Jesuits.

Church-run schools, including Marist Brothers schools across NSW, St Joseph’s College, Hunters Hill, Red Bend Catholic College, Forbes, Parramatta Marist High School, and other Catholic schools in NSW.

Parishes, including St Patrick’s Catholic Church, Wallsend.

Non-Catholic churches, including the Anglican Church in Australia and the Church of England Boys’ Society.

If your institution is not listed here, contact us. We act in matters involving many more religious institutions than are published on this site.

The National Redress Scheme and church abuse

Many religious institutions are members of the National Redress Scheme. However, accepting a redress payment permanently extinguishes your right to bring a civil compensation claim against the same institution. For survivors with viable civil claims, the Scheme’s capped payments, averaging around $80,000 for serious abuse with a maximum of $150,000, are in most cases substantially less than a civil claim would produce. See how the two pathways compare on our National Redress Scheme guide.

Applications to the Scheme close on 30 June 2027. Before applying for or accepting any offer, we strongly recommend independent legal advice. We do not lodge redress applications, but we provide free, confidential advice on whether the Scheme or a civil claim is the better pathway for you.

Limitation periods for church abuse claims

Every Australian state and territory has removed or relaxed time limits for civil claims arising from child sexual abuse. In New South Wales, the limitation period has been removed, so in most cases the fact that abuse happened decades ago does not by itself prevent a claim now. Individual circumstances still matter. Many of our clients are pursuing claims for abuse that took place 20, 30, or 40 years ago.

Some survivors previously signed deeds of release or settlement agreements with dioceses or religious orders. Reforms in several states, including NSW, Victoria, and Queensland, allow courts to set aside some of these agreements where it is just and reasonable to do so. If you signed a settlement in the past and are unsure whether you still have options, contact us. Read more about changes in NSW allowing settlements to be overturned.

For an explanation of limitation periods across Australia, see our guide to time limits for historical abuse claims.

How Koffels approaches church abuse claims

Koffels has represented survivors of clergy and church abuse for over 15 years. Our institutional abuse practice includes matters against some of Australia’s largest Catholic dioceses and religious orders, and we represented the survivor in AA v Maitland-Newcastle before the High Court of Australia.

We file formal legal proceedings in the vast majority of matters we take on. Most matters settle at mediation rather than going to a hearing. In appropriate cases, we have secured written apologies from institutions as part of the negotiated outcome, in addition to the financial settlement.

Initial consultations are free and confidential.

Frequently asked questions

Can I make a claim if the priest or brother who abused me is dead?

Yes. A civil compensation claim for church abuse is made against the institution, not only the individual offender, so the offender’s death does not prevent a claim against the diocese or religious order. Many of our matters involve offenders who have since died, never faced criminal charges, or were moved between institutions. Read more about claims where the abuser has died.

What if the diocese or religious order says it is not responsible for the abuse?

This is a common defence, particularly where the offender was a priest or member of an order rather than an employee. In AA v Maitland-Newcastle [2026] HCA 2, a majority of the High Court held that a diocese that took on the care, supervision, or control of a child owed that child a non-delegable duty of care, and that abuse by the priest it entrusted with the child breached that duty. Whether that duty applies in your case depends on the facts, and we assess this as part of your claim.

What if the church or institution I was abused in no longer exists?

Many Catholic parishes, schools, and institutions have closed, merged, or restructured. In most cases, legal responsibility passes to a successor body, the diocese or archdiocese that oversaw the institution, or an insurer. Identifying the correct defendant in historical church abuse matters is part of assessing your claim.

I signed a settlement with the diocese years ago. Do I still have options?

Possibly. Reforms in several states, including NSW, Victoria, and Queensland, allow survivors to apply to have past settlements set aside where it is just and reasonable to do so, for example where the survivor was not independently represented, did not understand what they were signing, or the settlement was clearly inadequate. Contact us to discuss whether your circumstances fall within these reforms.

Can I make a claim if I also reported the abuse to the police?

Yes. Civil compensation claims and criminal prosecutions are separate processes. A civil claim does not depend on a criminal conviction, or even a criminal investigation. Many survivors pursue civil claims while criminal proceedings are underway or after they have concluded, and some pursue civil claims where no criminal charges were ever laid. We can advise on how the two processes interact in your circumstances.

How much compensation can I expect from a church abuse claim?

There is no standard figure. Compensation is assessed on your individual circumstances, including the severity and duration of the abuse, its impact on your health, career, relationships, and quality of life, and the evidence available. For survivors with viable claims, a civil claim generally produces substantially more than the National Redress Scheme, where the maximum payment is $150,000.

Who is the best church abuse compensation lawyer?

A specialist church abuse compensation lawyer should have extensive experience in claims against the type of institution or religious order involved in your matter, a track record of preparing claims thoroughly so they are settled for what they are worth, and a clear, honest approach to advising you on whether civil compensation or the National Redress Scheme is the better option in your circumstances. Koffels has acted in church abuse claims across Australia for over 15 years and represented the survivor in AA v Maitland-Newcastle before the High Court of Australia.

Church Abuse Compensation