Documents published by the Federal Court of Australia last week revealed that the now former head of the King’s School, Tony George, and his former employer had agreed to resolve a legal dispute on “confidential terms”.
George had launched a legal action late last year over his dismissal. He is one of two heads of prominent Sydney Anglican schools to launch court proceedings over their dismissal, the other being Tim Petterson, the former head of Shore.
“Ken Chapman, chairman of The Council of The King’s School, wrote to parents to notify them of the development,” the Sydney Morning Herald reported.
“’The School Council and Mr George advise that they have resolved matters, and that Mr George’s term as Headmaster of The King’s School has concluded by agreement on 19 January 2026,’ he said.
“’This has been a challenging period for everyone. Both the Council and Mr George regret any disruption or difficulty this has caused students, staff, and families.’”
The bland statement confirms the existence of an agreement announced in the Federal Court. But the Tony George/ King’s School matter also represents a challenge to a newish policy of the Anglican Diocese of Sydney.
A policy restricting the use of Non Disclosure Agreements was passed by the 2024 Synod (9church parliament). The new policy followed a campaign against NDA’s by church workers and others who believed they were being used to cover up misconduct. Employment matters was the main focus of disquiet.
While permitting a form of NDA to keep financial details of a settlement quiet, or to protect IP, the new policy states, “We will not use a confidentiality agreement:
• to preference the reputation of [insert name of church / Parish / organisation / school] at the expense of truth;
• for the purpose of covering up or hiding sin, misconduct, or conflict…”
A model pledge was adopted by the Synod Standing Committee last year intended for use by diocesan organisations, in order to express their position in relation to the use of non-disclosure agreements. It is designed to be adopted in a public way (e.g., on the organisation’s website) as an alternative to the model policy.”
The pledge reads “We are committed to conducting all of our affairs in a way that’s consistent with Biblical principles, and for the good of all we serve. We are committed to the protection of the vulnerable, the pursuit of truth, justice, repentance from sin, and reconciliation where there are broken relationships. We see a place for appropriate and reasonable uses of confidentiality agreements where they are consistent with our principles, but we are committed never to using confidentiality agreements to hide or cover up sin, misconduct, or conflict. We are committed to preserving the freedom of all people to make formal complaints about the conduct of others. We will not seek to preference our reputation at the expense of truth. We are committed to dealing with misconduct and conflict in the light rather than in the darkness.”
Tony George has stated that media reports of what led to his leaving the school have been inaccurate. The purpose of this piece is not to re-litigate the specifics of that case, with some parents petitioning the school council to retain George.
Instead, the issue to explore is whether the Sydney Anglican policy restricting NDAs has fallen at its first major hurdle.
This writer anticipates the possibility that parties involved in the case may point out that, rather than a document titled “Non Disclosure Agreement” being signed, a settlement was achieved in a court case.
That would seem to go against the spirit of the Synod motion that adopted the new policy, which passed overwhelmingly.
In addition, the majority of the school council, apart from members appointed by the old boys organisation, will have been required to pledge to “exercise my powers and discharge my duties in accordance with the constitution, applicable law and ordinances applicable to the Diocesan organisation,” under the diocesan governance policy.
But perhaps the new Sydney Anglican policy regarding NDAs has not made it to North Parrammata yet. Or, alternatively that clever lawyering has managed to move past it.
The Anglican Diocese of Sydney supports the use of non-disclosure agreements by the Shore School Council against victims of abuse attempting to receive settlement.
That is a bold claim, but I should also declare that I have been offered 4 settlement offers from the school varying from $450,000 to $1,050,000 since the school became aware of me in 2019 through my then lawyers. Yet, I had made it clear before the first offer was made that I would not sign any NDA to reach settlement. The main reason for my decision was lack of trust in them due in part to their selection of an infamous lawyer to defend the school – search “John Dalzell Ellis defence Royal Commission Pell Catholic Church”. I saw this as a most aggressive step by the Diocese and Council (Diocese clergy and appointees dominate Council, including the Archbishop) in response to an approach from a registered Victim of Crime who was sexually abused by a known paedofile who abused many boys at the school.
Before the first offer was received in January 2019, I asked for a meeting with the whole council. Instead, I was offered a meeting with the Council Chair ( Bay Warburton) , the Headmaster (Tim Petterson), the school Community Chaplain (Nick Foord) and another council member whose name I cannot remember as I write this.
At that meeting, the Chairman opened the circle of 5 chairs with a sorry to me. Sorry for what happened to me, sorry for the school not delivering on psychiatric and psychological care as previous Headmaster Tim
Wright had promised me over the phone when I spoke to him in October 2019 – more than 12 months prior. No, they disowned me and their promises and I suffered greatly – search Andrew Coffey Shore for article..
After the sorries, the Chairman asked me to understand that council members were volunteers, that many were inexperienced, he had only been Chairman for a year, and that they had no experience in dealing with situations like this.
At my most vulnerable, with head bowed in a circle of reconciliation (I hoped!), the Chairman had told a monstrous lie! I knew that my lawyers took on another former Shore boy as a client I. The weeks leading up to my contacting them. So, I knew that there was another ex-Shore boy one ahead of me in the queue. Only later did I discover that his case involved same teacher, same year as I was raped.
I kept it together somehow in the meeting and told my life story. We said our goodbyes and the Chaplain walked me back to the train station. Once we were outside the School gates, Nick told me to contact my lawyers to ask if they knew of any such matters that had been recently resolved. He told me that what the Chairman had said to me was untrue – a lie. The Chairman had been very much involved in the weeks prior in settling another child sex abuse claim involving the same teacher who raped me. I was horrified, and grateful of Nick being honest.
I later contacted the School Council, The Archbishop as President, the Old Boys (5 on Council), the School’s lawyer Dalzell, about what happened, wanting an investigation. The silence was deafening from Diocese, Archbishop, Old Boys and the other Council members (how many clergy? 8, 9 or more?).
I have had to rack up close to half a million dollars in legal expenses to date. I own no home, no super, no savings and renting on a disability pension with my wife who is on Aged Pension. My mental health prognosis is very poor as the years of battling for the truth to be heard as a minimum requirement to any settlement with Shore School and the Sydney Anglican Diocese. I have recently written to both Archbishop and Archdeacon asking them to remove the silencing conditions of their NDAs as a step towards resolving my matter. They know that I wish to take seperate legal action against the Chairnan, the Archbishop and others.
I should have mentioned that I have a recording of the Chairman lying to me. I have said that I will not use it in my current case against the school council, but that it will be released after I die. Let them deny it…
Shore and the Sydney Diocese do not believe in removing all NDAs from their child abuse settlements. The more distressing the details of the abuse, the more determined they are to bury the evidence at all costs to victims.
This is a disgraceful situation.