A school principal whose conduct towards a female student teacher was “predatory in nature” has had his name removed from the register of teachers by the High Court.
A Teaching Council disciplinary panel found the principal’s conduct involved repeated, deliberate boundary violations and an abuse of power. The findings, it said, reflected a serious abuse of a position of trust and authority by a principal over a young student teacher.
The High Court heard the principal hugged the student teacher as well as placing his hands inside her jacket, touching her back and waist. On another occasion he said he would like to take her to the theatre and opera and book a hotel room in Dublin.
It was further claimed the principal had brought the student teacher to his office, told her he liked her and would like to come to an arrangement or relationship which would benefit her.
READ MORE
None of the parties involved or the school outside Dublin can be identified by order of the court. The student teacher’s complaints referred to events a number of years ago.
Opening the Teaching Council’s case, JP McDowell of Fieldfisher solicitors said a council disciplinary committee panel, in March last year, found that five allegations were proven beyond a reasonable doubt and amounted to professional misconduct.
In October, 2024, it was decided to impose the sanction of removing the principal’s name from the register of teachers. He would not be eligible to apply to have it restored for 15 years.
The Teaching Council panel said the case involved conduct of a most serious nature, which included sending an unsolicited and inappropriate invitation to a young student teacher to travel to a funeral. The case also involved surreptitious physical contact at a school event, followed by an inappropriate late-night text.
Furthermore, it involved “predatory conduct in the school including hugging, locking doors and proposing an arrangement or relationship of a sexual and inappropriate nature”.
There was also, the panel said, attempted use of inducements and alleged prior assistance to other women in order to pursue a sexual and inappropriate relationship with a student teacher.
The panel found that only removal with a substantial period of ineligibility would adequately protect the public, maintain confidence in the profession and mark the gravity of the misconduct.
“Given the predatory and coercive elements, the exploitation of professional power and the absence of meaningful insight, the misconduct which occurred in this case is fundamentally incompatible with the privileges and responsibilities of teaching,” the panel said.
The conduct in the case was at the upper end of the scale, the panel said. It added that a strong message needed to be sent to show the principal’s conduct “was absolutely unacceptable”.
It referred to aggravating features, including that the events which occurred were frightening and intimidating for a young and quite vulnerable student teacher.
“There was a significant power imbalance between the principal and the young student teacher. The conduct at issue was predatory in nature. This was not an isolated lapse in judgment, rather the conduct involved repeated, deliberate boundary violations and an abuse of power,” the panel said.
President of the High Court, Mr Justice David Barniville, made an order confirming the Teaching Council sanction to remove the name of the principal from the register and that he cannot reapply for 15 years.
