Firefighter acquitted of drugs offences secures injunction preventing disciplinary hearing against him

A firefighter who earlier this year was acquitted of drugs offences has secured a temporary High Court injunction preventing his employer from holding a disciplinary meeting into allegations against him.

At a vacation sitting of the High Court on Thursday, Ms Justice Marguerite Bolger granted Michael Morgan an interim injunction restraining Tipperary County Council from holding the meeting, which was due to take place on Friday morning at 11am.

Last February a jury at Nenagh Circuit Criminal Court acquitted Mr Morgan, then 43, of Cluain Muillean, Nenagh of charges arising from the discovery of €78,000 of cocaine, allegedly found in a lunch box at a locker at Nenagh fire station in January 2018.

When the drugs were found, Mr Morgan was not in the fire station, his locker had been open, and a subsequent Garda examination of the drugs did not find any forensic link to him.

Why does Dublin Airport want to demolish North Terminal, an icon of Irish modernist architecture?

---

Landmark Baker’s Corner pub for sale with full planning for student accommodation scheme at €7m

---

“People think ‘there are hostages – it is what it is’. But there are families who cannot carry on with their lives”

---

Stripe weighs deal for new Dublin headquarters at Wilton Park

---

He denied any wrongdoing and said the lunch box had been in the locker for some time.

He was suspended by the council from his job on full pay over the incident.

Mr Morgan’s friend John Walsh, then 36, of Coille Bheithe, Nenagh was found guilty by the jury of possession of cocaine, as well as possession of cocaine for sale or supply.

Mr Walsh was acquitted of allegedly possessing cocaine worth €13,000 or more, contrary to section 15(a) of the Misuse of Drugs Act.

Despite his acquittal Mr Morgan was informed by the council that it was maintaining internal disciplinary proceedings against him.

Represented by Patrick O’Reilly SC, appearing with Emma Cassidy BL instructed by solicitor Setanta Landers, Mr Morgan claimed the process is unfair and in breach of fair procedures.

Counsel argued that the employer had failed to disclose in proper detail the exact nature of the breaches of discipline against Mr Morgan, which he said it is required to do.

Counsel also told the court that his client was only informed in recent days by his employer that it intends to raise unspecified matters that arose out of the criminal trial, in the disciplinary process.

Counsel said that his client was concerned that matters could be put to his client at the meeting which Mr Morgan would not have a proper opportunity to respond to fully.

Counsel said that Mr Morgan is entitled to know in advance exactly what he is being accused of by his employer.

Ruling on the injunction application Ms Justice Bolger expressed the court’s concern about certain aspects of the disciplinary procedures, particularly the council informing Mr Morgan for the first time on September 13th last that it intended to raise issues that arose out of the criminal trial.

The judge also noted that while Mr Morgan had a right of appeal of any decision made in the disciplinary process, she said that such an appeal would only be “a review of the facts” and therefore would not consider any new facts that Mr Morgan might wish to raise.

Based on the evidence before the court the judge said she was satisfied to grant a temporary injunction, on an ex parte basis, restraining the meeting from taking place.

Mr Morgan, the court said had raised a strong issue to be tried.

The court added that the damages would not be an adequate remedy, and that the balance of justice merited the granting of an injunction, halting the proposed meeting.

The judge adjourned the matter to a date in October when the new legal term commences.

Both sides were given liberty to seek to bring the matter back before the court should the need arise.