"The Vatican" loses on sovereign-immunity claim

The Washington Post reports: 

A federal judge ruled Wednesday that a sex abuse lawsuit against the Vatican can move forward with its claim that the Holy See bears responsibility for a priest who was transferred from city to city even though he was known to be a molester. 

U.S. District Judge Michael Mosman said in his decision that there are exceptions to the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act, under which the Vatican is typically immune from the jurisdiction of U.S. courts.

Rejecting the Vatican's bid to dismiss the case, Mosman ruled that there was enough of a connection between the Vatican and the priest, who died in 1970, for him to be considered a Vatican employee under Oregon law.

The lawyer bringing the case, Jeffrey Anderson, "frequently represents abuse victims" (and has made millions of dollars by -- in his words -- "suing the shit" out of the Church.  ed.)  called the ruling a "titanic legal victory":

[This is] the first time any court has held or acknowledged there is a basis in law to hold the Holy See accountable for cover up and concealment and this international movement of predatory priests.

I'd be interested to hear from any canonists out there whether it is plausible -- from the Church's perspective, anyway -- to characterize the relationship between a priest and the Holy See as an employee-employer relationship.