The Court of Appeal dismissed Mary McEneaney’s appeal against the High Court’s refusal to quash her transfer from Largy College in Clones to St Mogues College in Bawnboy. The judgment, delivered by the President on 2 March 2016, upheld the transfer decision as reasonable and within the Board’s authority. The source does not set out a separate conclusion on her challenge to being placed on administrative leave with full pay.
McEneaney, a home economics teacher employed by the education and training board since 1999, sought judicial review of both decisions. The transfer followed complaints from parents and pupils about her classroom conduct, coverage of examination courses and absences. The judgment recounts the complaints and concerns about her health as background; it does not find that she was guilty of the complaints.
The Board initially began an informal process under Circular 59/2009, which sets out procedures for addressing teacher competence and conduct concerns. At a February 2013 meeting, a union representative proposed team teaching. The judgment says McEneaney did not agree, and that the meeting was interrupted after she told an official she was feeling suicidal. She was then absent from work on medical certification. The Board sought medical reports, and its doctor later reported that she was fit to work, while referring to possible supports and a transfer.
In June, McEneaney asked to transfer, but later withdrew that request. In August, the Board’s chief executive told her she could either remain at Largy and face an investigation or move to Bawnboy, where the school and classes were smaller. She declined the transfer. The chief executive then directed a change of headquarters, referring to Memorandum V7, and described the move as initially for a year, with a possible later review. The Board also placed her on administrative leave with full pay after she refused to move.
The appeal argued that Circular 59/2009 required the Board to follow a disciplinary process, that the doctor’s fitness opinion undermined the transfer, that Memorandum V7 did not authorise it, and that the decisions breached fair procedures. The Court of Appeal rejected the challenge to the transfer. It reasoned that the informal process had continued as the situation shifted from a potential disciplinary matter to a human relations and health concern. It also concluded that the Board had authority to transfer a teacher between schools in its jurisdiction, provided it acted reasonably and gave notice, and that this transfer was not punishment.
The court held there was no basis to quash the transfer and dismissed the appeal. The supplied judgment does not state a distinct appellate finding or order on the administrative leave decision.