Decision not to expel student who allegedly injured classmate with chisel challenged

A school's board of management has initiated High Court proceedings over a decision not to expel a student who allegedly injured a classmate with a wood chisel.

The secondary school board had decided to expel the teenager following the alleged incident, but this verdict was overturned upon appeal to the Department of Education, which appointed a three-person committee under section 29 of the 1998 Education Act.

Neither the teen nor the school he attended can be named for legal reasons.

Feichin McDonagh SC, for the board of management, told the High Court on Monday that the decision to exclude the teenager arose following a “very serious incident”.

The board, which took a “serious view” of the matter”, is seeking an order quashing the committee’s findings, said Mr McDonagh.

As part of the action, it is claimed there had been some “horseplay” in the woodwork classroom involving sanitiser being sprayed onto the teenager’s bag. Shortly afterwards, prior to a supervising teacher arriving, the boy allegedly pursued this student across the room and stabbed him in the arm with a chisel, resulting in a substantial gash which required a trip to a hospital emergency department where the student received stitches, according to documents put before the court.

It is claimed the boy has a history of disruptive behaviour which previously led to his suspension on a number of occasions. Following one incident, in which he is said to have committed serious criminal damage to a school room, a suspension was chosen over expulsion as the school had regard to his diagnoses of ADHD and Aspergers, as well as other mitigating factors, it is claimed. However, at this point it was allegedly noted that further behaviour of this kind would not be tolerated.

The board seeks an order overturning the committee’s decision on grounds that the findings were reached in breach of fair procedures, including due to alleged bias and pre-judgement. It is also claimed the committee took into account material it was not entitled to and “wholly disregarded” certain evidence before it.

It is alleged that the committee found as fact submissions from the boy’s parents claiming he had been a victim of bullying. This, the board claims, was hearsay and unsupported by any direct evidence.

The board also claims the committee purported to find that the school had excluded the child on foot of a single incident. It submitted that this conclusion is “flawed” as the committee was told that the pupil’s allegedly poor record of behaviour both before and after the incident had informed the decision.

Permission to bring the challenge against the Secretary-General of the Department of Education and the three-person committee was granted on an ex-parte basis by Mr Justice Charles Meenan. The child's parents are notice parties to the action.

He also directed that a temporary stay be placed on the implementation of the committee’s decision. However, as this was granted with only one side represented in the court, the judge said the respondents or notice parties can apply to have it removed or varied by giving 72 hours’ notice.

The matter of the stay will be revisited when the case returns before the court in two weeks, he said.