Former swimming coach Ger Doyle at Wexford court. Photo Patrick Browne
FOUR VICTIMS of convicted abuser, and former national and Olympic swimming coach, Gerard Doyle, have settled their High Court actions.
The four men, who had sued over their abuse by Doyle when they were young boys, settled their action against New Ross Town Council last week. The former local authority was the swimming coach’s employer at the time.
He worked as a swimming coach at the old swimming pool in New Ross which was owned and operated by the local authority.
After several hours of talks last Tuesday, David McGrath SC, told Mr. Justice Anthony Barr, the cases brought against New Ross Town Council were all settled and could be struck out [and] the actions against Doyle (52) could also be struck out.
The court heard that judgment had been entered against Doyle last November and the case before the court was for assessment of damages only.
The four victims, who cannot be identified, had sued in relation to the sexual abuse they suffered on different dates around the 1980s.
Doyle was sentenced to six-and-half years in prison in July, 2012, after being convicted of 35 sex-related offences against children committed over the space of a decade.
He had pleaded not guilty at Kilkenny Circuit Criminal Court to one charge of sexual assault and 34 charges of indecent assault.
The offences took place at New Ross Swimming Pool between January, 1981, and December, 1993.
After a five-day trial the jury returned a unanimous verdict in the case.
Doyle had previously been convicted of the offences at Wexford Circuit Criminal Court and sentenced to six-and-half years in prison but subsequently a re-trial was ordered on a legal technicality following an appeal to the High Court.
In the High Court case on Tuesday the four men claimed there was an alleged failure on behalf of the Town Council to prevent them being subjected to sexual abuse. It was also alleged there was failure to ensure Doyle was competent and a suitable person to interact with young people.
It was further claimed there was an alleged failure to remove Doyle or relieve him from his duties when they knew or ought to have known of his sexual proclivities. The claims were denied.
