A MAN in his mid 40s who challenged a VEC decision to suspend him from a social studies course involving child care after the education authority was told of allegations of child abuse has won his case in the High Court.
However, Mr Justice Barr, in his judgment, expressed the hope that the man would recognise that in all the circumstances, the time had come to turn his intellectual energies towards qualifying for a career in some other area.
When the case was at hearing last year the judge ruled that no names should be published.
In his judgment, he said the man had challenged the right of the Eastern Health Board to furnish certain information about him to the VEC with a view to having him excluded from a social studies course relating to child care and similar work.
The man also challenged the VEC decision to act on allegations made about him by the EHB without giving him any opportunity of being heard in his defence.
The plaintiff had received primary education, but in recent years went back to college and started the social studies course in September 1995. This included three weeks supervised practical work experience with children. ,The course ended in May 1996.
The judge said that, although some of the allegations were of a grievous nature, none appeared to have been put to the man at any time prior to January 1996. No complaints had been referred to the gardai.
Mr Justice Barr said that the EHB had failed in its duty of affording the applicant the benefit of constitutional justice and fair procedures in not furnishing him with information as to the charges against him in not giving him an adequate opportunity to defend himself, and in not taking reasonable care in checking the accuracy of information passed to the VEC.
The VEC was not entitled to exclude the man from the entire course until he had been informed of, and had been given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the allegations against him.
However, there was a "Catch 22" situation. The EHB and VEC had an obligation to protect children from foreseeable risk of abuse. In the end, the EHB, having again reviewed the situation in the light of its obligations, might regard itself as obliged to retain its opinion that the man was not suitable for such work. In that event it would inform the VEC, which would probably withdraw the man from the child care course.