The High Court remitted Patrick Walsh’s disciplinary case to the Appeals Board after quashing its earlier decision, but said any further disciplinary hearing must be confined to a single charge of discreditable conduct.
Mr Justice Hogan’s judgment of 7 November 2013 followed an earlier ruling that the Appeals Board had acted beyond its powers when it partly upheld and partly quashed a Board of Inquiry determination, then recommended Walsh’s dismissal on the upheld part. The court had quashed that decision. The issue in this proceeding was whether to remit the matter for reconsideration.
The disciplinary case arose from an altercation at a music concert in September 2007. Walsh was accused of failing to submit to a legal drugs search, using his status as an off-duty Garda for private advantage, and using abusive language towards a sergeant. He was acquitted in the District Court in November 2008 of a separate charge of possessing amphetamine. The Garda Commissioner then directed that the first disciplinary charge, possession of a controlled drug, would not be considered.
A Board of Inquiry later found Walsh guilty of failing to submit to a legal search and improper practice, and recommended that he retire or resign rather than be dismissed. After an appeal and a second inquiry, a new Board found two breaches and recommended dismissal. The Commissioner dismissed Walsh with effect from 16 April 2012. On a further appeal, the Appeals Board upheld the discreditable conduct finding and recommended dismissal on that charge, but quashed the improper practice finding.
The High Court said remittal was needed to clarify the parties’ legal position. Without it, it would be unclear whether the earlier inquiry decision stood and whether Walsh had been dismissed on one charge or two. The judge acknowledged the strain of another disciplinary hearing, but was not persuaded that this required stopping the proceedings altogether.
The court said it would be unfair for a new hearing to extend beyond the single discreditable conduct charge. It also noted that prior boards had differed about whether that charge concerned the search attempted by private contractors or the later search by Gardaí. A newly established Board of Inquiry should clarify the charge’s scope.
The judgment’s conclusion remitted the matter to the Appeals Board under Order 84, rule 27(4) of the Rules of the Superior Courts. The judge added that, if necessary, he would grant an order restraining any further hearing of disciplinary charges other than the discreditable conduct charge. The judgment does not state the subsequent outcome.