The High Court dismissed Paul Leblique’s application to have two Iarnród Éireann managers committed for contempt, or the company’s assets sequestered, over his continued absence from train-driving duties. The court found that the company had followed an earlier order requiring a stopping-short incident to be dealt with under its Driver Development and Support System.
The application concerned an order made by Mr Justice Gilligan on 28 April 2017. That order directed that the 25 January 2016 stopping-short incident be handled under the scheme and made no order on the balance of Mr Leblique’s claim. The present court said it would consider only whether the company’s procedures complied with that direction. The parties agreed that committal should be considered only for a clear breach and as a last resort; the court refused the committal and sequestration requests.
Mr Leblique, a train driver, had stopped short of the platform at Tara Street, leaving the last carriage out of line with the platform. No passengers got off. After disciplinary proceedings, he was dismissed. An appeal upheld findings on two charges, but the stopping-short incident was assigned to a driver development programme and the sanction for refusing a urine sample was demotion. In the earlier litigation, Iarnród Éireann accepted that he had to be reinstated. He returned to the company in late April 2017, with his salary restored, but had not resumed driving.
The company said he was being assessed under its safety procedures, including review of his driving history and an occupational psychology assessment. Its counsel argued that temporary removal from safety-critical duties could occur during that process. The psychologist’s recommendations, as described in the judgment, were advisory: they included extensive retraining before any return to driving and a different role for six to nine months to allow trust to be rebuilt. The final decision about whether he could return remained with the company.
The court noted that Gilligan J’s order did not expressly direct immediate train-driving duties and that the earlier hearing had not addressed other stopping-short incidents later considered by the safety panel. It found the support process was close to completion and that the psychologist had not recommended an immediate return to driving. Citing the company’s responsibility for passenger safety, the court concluded that Iarnród Éireann had complied with the order and dismissed the application. It did not itself decide whether Mr Leblique would return to driving.