Judgment: 2023-05-19 · Court archive

High Court upholds paid suspension of Enoch Burke and awards €15,000 for trespass

The court ruled that the Board of Management followed fair procedures in suspending the teacher in August 2022. It also ordered a permanent injunction against his unauthorised entry to the school, subject to reinstatement or re-employment.

High Court · [2023] IEHC 288

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • The Board of Management of Wilson’s Hospital School (Plaintiff)
  • Enoch Burke (Defendant)
  • Alexander Owens (Judge)
What

The court ruled that the Board of Management followed fair procedures in suspending the teacher in August 2022. It also ordered a permanent injunction against his unauthorised entry to the school, subject to reinstatement or re-employment.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Wilson’s Hospital School
When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 22 August 2022

    The High Court has ruled that the Board of Management of Wilson’s Hospital School lawfully placed teacher Enoch Burke on paid administrative leave on 22 August 2022, pending disciplinary proceedings. Mr Justice Alexander Owens also ordered a permanent injunction preventing Burke from entering school premises without permission and awarded the Board €15,000 in damages for trespass.

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The court traced the disciplinary process to disputes in May and June 2022 over the school’s arrangements for a pupil changing gender identity. The principal reported that Burke had challenged the arrangements at a staff meeting and interrupted a school chapel service and later events on 21 June. Those incidents formed the basis of her report to the Board. They were allegations considered in the disciplinary process, not findings by the court that the reported conduct amounted to misconduct warranting dismissal.

The High Court has ruled that the Board of Management of Wilson’s Hospital School lawfully placed teacher Enoch Burke on paid administrative leave on 22 August 2022, pending disciplinary proceedings. Mr Justice Alexander Owens also ordered a permanent injunction preventing Burke from entering school premises without permission and awarded the Board €15,000 in damages for trespass.

The judgment, delivered on 19 May 2023, concerned the suspension decision and the Board’s claims for trespass relief. It did not determine the validity of Burke’s later dismissal. The court said that issue, including the outcome of his appeal, was outside the scope of this action.

The court traced the disciplinary process to disputes in May and June 2022 over the school’s arrangements for a pupil changing gender identity. The principal reported that Burke had challenged the arrangements at a staff meeting and interrupted a school chapel service and later events on 21 June. Those incidents formed the basis of her report to the Board. They were allegations considered in the disciplinary process, not findings by the court that the reported conduct amounted to misconduct warranting dismissal.

The Board considered the principal’s report on 15 August and invited Burke to a meeting on 22 August to address whether he should be suspended with pay. The judge found that Burke had 35 minutes to make submissions but focused on issues the Board considered outside that meeting’s purpose. He did not address whether he would comply with the principal’s direction about interacting with pupils. The Board was entitled to limit the discussion and to end his further participation, the court held.

The Board later decided to suspend Burke because it was concerned he might repeat his behaviour at school if permitted to teach. The court found that decision rational and reasonable on the information available to the Board at the time, and that the process complied with its contractual obligations. Later conduct could inform trespass relief and damages, the judge said, but could not retrospectively justify the August suspension.

The judge separately held that suspension ended Burke’s permission to enter school premises. Even if a suspension or dismissal is later found to breach an employment contract, that alone does not give an employee a right to return to the workplace. The injunction is to remain in force unless or until Burke is re-employed or reinstated as a teacher.

The court also dismissed Burke’s counterclaim because it had not been advanced. The judgment set out a provisional view that the Board should receive its costs, with either party given 28 days to make submissions before any costs order is finalised.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review