An education and training board that allegedly fired a school principal on foot of sexual harassment allegations made against him has agreed to temporarily restore him to its payroll, the High Court has heard.
In August 2021, a female colleague made a written complaint of harassment and sexual harassment arising from text messages sent by the principal, according to court documents.
In a sworn statement, the principal said he accepted the text messages to the teacher were “not appropriate”, but did not accept they amounted to harassment or sexual harassment.
The principal alleges the disciplinary process arising from the complaint was “fundamentally flawed”, and claims his school’s patron organisation – a regional education and training board – “predetermined” its decision to dismiss him. The school confirmed his dismissal last week.
Owen Doyle: Chaotic cock-up cost Munster and it reflects badly on a number of people
Dublin-born Irish–American cardinal Kevin Farrell to run Vatican until pope elected
Pope Francis died of a stroke and ‘irreversible heart failure,’ the Vatican has said
New teachers will be fast-tracked into permanent posts to tackle staffing ‘crisis’
The principal claims the complaint was not escalated by the complainant, but rather by another person
Last week, Mr Justice Brian Cregan permitted lawyers for the principal to serve his proceedings challenging the dismissal of the school.
On Wednesday, Joe Jeffers SC, appearing for the education and training board and instructed by Mason Hayes & Curran, told the judge his clients had agreed to give certain undertakings to the court.
The school has agreed to restore the principal to its payroll, not to advertise a principal position vacancy, and not to announce his dismissal, Mr Justice Cregan noted.
Mr Jeffers said the undertakings will remain in place until the case returns to court next month.
Mr Justice Cregan adjourned the case on consent to next month.
In the proceedings, the principal alleges that following the August 2021 complaint, a mediation process led to a resolution between the parties. However, the complaint was escalated to officials at the school’s patron education and training board and a formal disciplinary process was initiated, he says.
The principal claims the complaint was not escalated by the complainant, but rather by another person, thus rendering the entire disciplinary process fundamentally flawed.
He raises concerns with various other aspects of the disciplinary process brought against him. He claims that an independent investigation into the allegations went beyond its terms of reference, and was prejudicially flawed.
The principal is seeking various reliefs, including an injunction restraining the defendant from taking any further steps in the purported termination of his employment.
