The High Court has confirmed CORU’s decision to cancel a social worker’s registration, rejecting her appeal against the sanction. The court found that the disciplinary process was as fair as possible despite her non-participation, and that cancellation was proportionate and necessary to protect the public and uphold professional standards.
The appeal was brought under section 69 of the Health and Social Care Professionals Act 2005. The applicant argued that she had not received a fair hearing, including because she could not secure legal aid. She also described her personal circumstances and made allegations of sexual abuse against a former service user, identified in the judgment as Mr A. Those allegations were not determined in this appeal; the judge said criminal allegations were a matter for An Garda Síochána if appropriate complaints were made.
The court recounted that the applicant had been invited to participate in the professional inquiry but did not attend its hearing dates. Transcripts were sent to her, and the legal assessor and counsel put points from her correspondence to witnesses. The Health Committee found nine allegations proven and eight not proven to the required standard, according to the respondent’s submissions. It did not find a relevant medical disability proven. The Committee recommended cancellation, and CORU’s Council directed cancellation after the applicant attended and made oral submissions at its January 2020 meeting.
The High Court hearing took place remotely on 19 July 2021. The applicant participated and made oral submissions. The judge said she had not sought to introduce new evidence at that hearing. The court also refused an earlier request to postpone the appeal indefinitely, but granted a final five-week adjournment. It separately ordered that inquiry witnesses be anonymised and directed that nothing connected with the appeal be published if it could identify them. The order covered the applicant’s identity as well.
The judge acknowledged the applicant’s distress and vulnerability, but concluded that she had been heard on appeal and that the respondent had made extensive efforts to secure her participation. The court held that the registration decision was just and proportionate in light of the serious professional misconduct findings and the evidence before the regulator. It made an order confirming CORU’s cancellation decision.