July hearing for student’s bid to have private tutors join assessment

Boy had not been attending school after refusing to wear a mask in common areas

The boy  claimed prolonged mask wearing agitated his migraine.

The boy claimed prolonged mask wearing agitated his migraine.

 

A Leaving Certificate student’s High Court challenge over a refusal to allow private tutors assist in assessing his calculated grades will be heard next month.

The boy, who cannot be identified, received private tutoring because he had not been attending his school after refusing to obey a requirement to wear a mask in the common areas.

Two weeks ago, his bid to bring a challenge to the mask wearing requirement failed but the separate issue concerning whether his school’s teachers can assess his accredited grades with the help of the private tutors has yet to be heard.

He had claimed prolonged mask wearing agitated his migraine.

He was not required to do so in the classroom as he was provided with a perspex screen.

The boy, suing through his mother, was refused permission by the court two weeks ago to bring a challenge against the State Examination Commission and the Minister for Education and Skills over the mask wearing requirement.

Mr Justice Charles Meenan said the mother, who personally represented him, had not presented any independent medical evidence to support the migraine claim.

She had failed to establish minimum requirements for an arguable case and he refused leave to bring proceedings on that issue.

The separate matter of allowing the tutors input into his calculated grades - assessed by the school’s teachers where the student chooses not to sit the exams — was adjourned. The Department of Education told his mother that, as a registered student in a post-primary school, he can only receive estimated percentage marks from his full-time teachers and not from tutors giving extra tuition outside school.

On Wednesday, Mr Justice Meenan said the only date available for the court to deal with the outstanding matter is July 2nd.

The boy’s mother told the judge there was a difficulty if the matter goes past the end of June with regard to talking to the school’s teachers.

The judge said he simply did not know the answer to that but July 2nd was the only date available.