You are on page 1of 11
NO. $1611860 VANCOUVER REGISTRY COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA BETWEE! ISEMARY ANDERSON PLAINTIFF AND: FATHER ERLINDO MOLON, ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF THE DIOCESE OF KAMLOOPS, A CORPORATION SOLE DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF APPLICATION Name of applicant: The plaintiff, Rosemary Anderson To the defendant: The Roman Catholic Bishop of the Diocese of Kamloops, A Corporation Sole ‘And tothe defendant: Father Erlindo Molen, by his Litigation Guardian, the Ontario Public Guardian and Trustee ‘TAKE NOTICE that an application will be made by the applicant to the presiding judge or master at the courthouse at 800 Smithe Street, Vancouver BC V6Z 2&1, at 9:45 a.m. on = April 1, 2019 for the orders set out in Part 1 below. Part 1; ORDERS SOUGHT 4. The defendant, The Roman Catholic Bishop of the Diocese of Kamloops (the “Bishop"), shall permit an independent supervising solicitor (an “ISS"), jointly appointed by the plaintiff and the defendant Bishop or alternatively appointed by ‘the Court, to supervise the search and collection of evidence for seizure at its premises of documents in its possession, power, or control, pertaining to: a) Consultations between then-Bishop Exner with his Presbyteral Counsel or any other Catholic clergy about the defendant, Fr. Erlindo Molon; 27peR19 1903083. 5058 1 (21422 81611860 om tome b) The plaintiff, the defendant Fr. Molon, or any other complaint or reference made in respect of Fr. Molon, that were held either in “Secret Archives’ or elsewhere; ©) Investigations undertaken by or on behalf of the defendant Bishop in respect of Fr. Molon; d) Parishioners and/or clergy who complained to then-Bishop Exner about Fr. Molon; e) Then-Bishop Exner’s efforts to get Fr. Molon treatment or assistance, at Southdowns or otherwise; 1) The plaintiff's communications with then-Bishop Exner about Fr. Molon; and g) Other classes of documents yet to be identified, relevant to the within action. The ISS will retain custody of the items seized. The plaintiff will not be entitled to inspect the items seized unless the defendant Bishop consents or the Court otherwise orders following a review. Following that search, seizure, and disclosure, the current Bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Kamloops, His Excellency Joseph P. Nguyen, be compelled to swear to an Affidavit under Oath that he does not have and never had any other relevant or material records in his possession or under his control, including but not limited to relevant documents contained inany Secret Archives. The ISS's reasonable fees and disbursements inourred in carrying out his or her duties shall initially be paid by the plaintiff, without prejudice to the right of the plaintiff to seek recovery of those costs from the defendant Bishop at the conclusion of the action. The examination for discovery of Archbishop Emeritus Exner on behalf of the Bishop continue, both in accordance with Rule’7-2(22) and generally, premised on the production of any new disclosure. Part 2: FACTUAL BASIS 1 1 The plaintiff alleges she was sexually assaulted by the defendant Catholic priest, Father Erlindo Molon, over several months in 1976 and 1977. | She brings this action seeking Judgment and damages for the injuries and losses she alleges arise as a result of the sexual assaults. The action is brought against the perpetrator Father Erlindo Molon who is alive but lacks capacity. He is represented by his litigation guardian, the Ontario Public Guardian and Trustee. ! “The action is also brought against the defendant Bishop, Fr. Molon's employer and supervising authority at the material time. | 10. 1. ‘A notice of civil claim was filed on behalf of the plaintiff on December 22, 2016. She advances claims for non-pecuniary damages, past lost earning capacity, aggravated damages, punitive damages, special damages, and health care costs. ‘A response to civil claim was filed by the Bishop on June 7, 2017, denying liability. ‘An amended response to civil claim was filed on behalf of the defendant Father Molon, by his litigation guardian, the Ontario Public Guardian and Trustee, on May 16, 2018. Liability is denied, The defendant Bishop served a list of documents dated September 6, 2017. ‘On December 12, 2017 plaintif’s counsel wrote to the defendant Bishop's counsel pursuant to Rule 7-1(10), requesting an amended list of documents, specifically reflecting an Identified pattem of previous sexual impropriaties. By letter dated December 18, 2017, the defendant Bishop's counsel responded warning that if the plaintiff brought application, he would respond that “a thorough search was done and all documents disclosed were listed. Costs to the Defendant”. Archbishop Emeritus Adam Joseph Exner was examined for discovery as representative of the defendant Bishop on August 14, 2018, He gave the following evidence at discovery relevant to the within application: + He was the Bishop of the Kamloops Diocese at the material time. (Qs.22-23) + Hes the Archbishop Emeritus of Vancouver. (Q. 8) + He is familiar with the Code of Canon Law. (Q.143-150) + As Bishop, he had the hierarchical responsibility and authority to control the priests, deacons, and laity in his jurisdiction and to impose Canonical penalties. (Q.178-184) * He himself did not have a role in producing the document disclosure on behalf of the Bishop in the within action. Defence counsel John Hogg, Q.C. worked with the existing Bishop's staff to look for relevant documents. (Q. 199-203) «Defence counsel Mr. Hogg answered for the witness in stating that the Bishop of Kamloops has no secret archive. (Q. 209) * Canon Law requires a Bishop to conduct an investigation into concerns about sexual violations, either personally or through a delegate. (Qs. 210-211) «Archbishop Exner was unaware that Canon Law requires such an investigation to be in writing, or that such writing be kept in a secret archive, (Q. 213) 3a