The High Court has quashed an appeal committee decision that overturned a school board’s exclusion of a student following an investigation into cannabis use and supply at the school. It ordered that the appeal be reconsidered by a newly constituted committee.
In a judgment delivered on 31 July 2013, Mr Justice Hedigan found that the committee had failed to explain why it concluded that the school could not provide definitive proof that the student supplied drugs or admitted supplying or offering them for sale. The court said that conclusion was contrary to the evidence before the committee and to the way the case had been presented at the appeal hearing.
The student, identified as C, was the son of notice parties A and B. The school board had decided to exclude him after an investigation. The judgment recounts evidence that C admitted using and supplying cannabis at school, including in interviews and a meeting attended by his parents and school officials. The parents’ appeal focused on alleged procedural shortcomings and the board’s refusal to grant leniency; it did not deny the alleged admissions or C’s involvement in sale and supply.
The appeal committee upheld the appeal on 19 April 2013. It described C’s involvement with drugs at the College in Galway as very serious, but said the school had not provided definitive proof of supply or an admission to supply or offer drugs for sale. It also identified shortcomings in the school’s procedures.
The High Court reviewed the committee’s decision under the limited jurisdiction applicable to judicial review. It held that the issue of C’s alleged admissions had not been disputed during the appeal and that the school’s case rested on more than interview notes: it also relied on later interviews, a report to the board, correspondence and accounts of meetings. The committee’s decision did not explain why it rejected that material.
The court quashed the appeal committee’s 19 April decision and the first respondent’s direction of 2 May 2013, and remitted the parents’ appeal to a freshly constituted appeal committee. It did not decide the appeal itself or determine what outcome the new committee should reach.