The High Court has restrained An Coimisiún le Rincí Gaelacha (CLRG) from suspending Irish dancing teacher and adjudicator Amanda Hennigan pending the determination of her proceedings or publication of the disciplinary hearing’s findings, whichever happens first. The court refused to stop that hearing from going ahead and directed that it progress as soon as possible.
The ruling, delivered by Ms Justice Eileen Roberts on 24 February 2023, concerns an interlocutory application, not a final determination of the dispute. The court did not decide whether Ms Hennigan breached CLRG’s Code of Conduct. It will hear the parties later on costs and any related orders.
The complaint arose from a screenshot of a text exchange between Ms Hennigan and an adjudicator at the 2019 All Ireland Championships. In the messages, Ms Hennigan asked for “a hand” with a dancer and gave the dancer’s competition results. The judgment says the exchange was incomplete and its context was unclear. Ms Hennigan argued that she neither sought nor received preferential treatment; evidence before the court was that the adjudicator gave the dancer lower marks than any other judge on the panel. CLRG argued that the message was a submission seeking favourable treatment and that the disciplinary hearing was the proper place to explain it.
CLRG informed Ms Hennigan on 12 October 2022 that a disciplinary hearing would be convened and that she was suspended from officiating at CLRG events. The organisation relied on a rule allowing suspension where an investigation into alleged gross misconduct finds sufficient evidence to invoke formal disciplinary procedures. The judge found no clear evidence that anyone had made an individual prima facie finding of gross misconduct against Ms Hennigan. The investigator’s report recommended a full investigation but did not address suspension, and the court said the messages were equivocal and did not expressly seek or offer favourable treatment.
The court also found that Ms Hennigan had not been given a chance to explain the messages or their context before her suspension. The judge said that explanation could have mattered, and that it was not enough to wait until a later hearing while the suspension continued indefinitely. The court concluded that she had established a strong case that she was not afforded natural justice in relation to the suspension, and that damages would not adequately address continuing harm to her health, reputation and wellbeing.
But the judge found that the case to halt the disciplinary process had not been made out. Although she described public statements during an ongoing investigation as unwise, she found no conclusive predetermination and considered that an independent panel could start afresh. The process could still be challenged later if it proved unfair. The judge stressed that CLRG must advance it with haste.