A primary school principal has failed in a High Court challenge over a finding against him of poor professional performance for a 19-week delay in reporting an incident to parents over the alleged inappropriate behaviour of a teacher towards a pupil with special needs.
Mr Justice Anthony Barr dismissed the principal’s claims that a Teaching Council disciplinary panel was incorrect in its finding against him.
Among the principal’s claims were that the panel failed to give adequate reasons for its decision and that the panel did not have or hear expert evidence before making that decision.
The court heard the complaint arose after a special needs assistant (SNA) made a complaint that a teacher had suddenly pulled ear muffs off the then nine-year-old boy and shouted at him. The child has autism and was non-verbal.
Of course Conor McGregor was best Irish person the White House could think of inviting on St Patrick’s Day
Yes, Amazon.ie will give Irish shoppers choice. But no, it’s not ‘good news for all’
Man who drank excessive amount of water after hospital procedure died from water intoxication, court hears
Why did Donald Trump bring Conor McGregor to the White House?
The SNA claimed in the complaint that after the earmuffs were pulled off, the child “was forced to place his fingers in his ears and got very upset”.
It was alleged the teacher shouted things like “do your work or you will not get your lunch” and continued to shout at the boy until he completed a jigsaw.
The child, it was also claimed by the SNA, finished the jigsaw after some time and began to eat his lunch with the other boys. Then, it was alleged, the teacher said “at least we know now that by taking his earphones off he’ll do his work” and “you’re lucky to be getting that”.
The court heard a Teaching Council disciplinary committee did not uphold a complaint about the incident against the teacher involved.
However, it found the principal guilty of poor professional performance for a 19-week delay in reporting the alleged incident to the parents.
The panel said the failure to inform the child’s parents of the report and complaint received by the principal was clearly a serious failure to meet the standards of competence that could reasonably be expected of a registered teacher.
The principal, who the court heard had a long, unblemished and distinguished career, maintained at the disciplinary hearing that he had done nothing wrong and had been trying to maintain confidentiality in the inquiry into the teacher involved, as mandated by the Department of Education.
Following the decision, the principal brought judicial review proceedings seeking to quash the disciplinary panel’s finding and its sanction of admonishment. The Teaching Council opposed the challenge.
In a judgment, Mr Justice Barr refused all the reliefs he sought.
The judge rejected the principal’s claim the disciplinary panel’s decision was flawed because of the absence of a primary school principal on the panel and/or because of its failure to call expert evidence.
The members of the panel “were more than competent” to deal with the matter and “had more than sufficient knowledge and experience” to enable them to reach a determination without requiring expert evidence, he said.
The court was satisfied that the disciplinary panel had made it clear why it reached the decision it did, and had set out its essential reasoning in doing so.
The panel rejected the principal’s evidence as to why he had not informed the parents during the relevant period, and did not find his evidence credible, the judge said.
The judge rejected a claim of objective bias on grounds that a member of the Teaching Council sat beside the child’s mother during the disciplinary hearing.
He further rejected an argument that the sanction of admonishment against the principal was irrational and inappropriate.
