With thanks to Mathisha Panagoda for drawing my attention to Lonergan v Trustees of The Sisters of Saint Joseph & Anor  VSC 651.
The decision arose from allegations of historical sexual abuse of a child by a priest, in respect of which liability was admitted. The plaintiff had made a prior claim and the parties agreed that the settlement of that claim should be set aside ().
Compensatory damages were assessed. In relation to aggravated and exemplary damages, the plaintiff did did establish the the defendantts knew, before he was abused, that the perpetrator had sexually abused other children while carrying out his duties as a priest (). Other issues were raised by the plaintiff but ultimately the Court did not make an award for aggravated or exemplary damages.
In relation to the monies previously received by the plaintiff in his prior settlement, there was a debate as to whether those should be taken into account and in effect offset against the current assessment. The Court held at :
For the following reasons I conclude that it is neither just nor reasonable to take account of the amount paid under the settlement agreement by setting it off against damages assessed in this proceeding. First, the Diocese obtained the real benefit of Mr Lonergan maintaining the confidentiality of the first settlement, yet Bishop Connors breached that term of the agreement when he communicated details of the settlement to Mr Lonergan’s cousin. Second, the compensation paid to Mr Lonergan under the settlement was very modest because of the legal barriers to prosecution of a claim against the defendants that he faced at the time. Third, the defendants have had the considerable benefit of protection by those barriers from a claim for adequate compensation for decades. Fourth, as I have already observed, Mr Lonergan is disadvantaged by the lapse of time since past loss was suffered and the effects of inflation, compounded by the unavailability of interest from the date of the cause of action.