A secondary school teacher who lost a victimisation claim at the Equality Tribunal against staff at Trinity College Dublin is to appeal to the Circuit Civil Court.
Judge John O'Hagan told Patrick Kelly, Deansrath, Clondalkin, Dublin, that Trinity College rather than the Equality Tribunal should be listed as respondents in the appeal. He would therefore strike out proceedings against the tribunal and substitute Trinity College as the proper respondent.
Mr Kelly alleges he was victimised by named Trinity College staff while attempting to complete a postgraduate social work course at the college in 2002/03.
The court heard that Mr Kelly had earlier applied for a postgraduate social work course in University College Dublin but was not among the three men and 47 women candidates selected.
Mr Kelly told Judge O'Hagan he had appealed UCD's decision to the director of the Equality Tribunal. This appeal, he said, had still not been determined. In the meantime, he had applied to Trinity College for inclusion in an identical course and had been successful.
He alleged that during the first year of the Trinity course the college authorities had found out about his dispute with UCD at the Equality Tribunal.
Mr Kelly claims things then changed and he alleges he was victimised by staff at Trinity and not allowed to continue with the second year of the course.
He had made complaints to the Equality Tribunal against his course director at Trinity College, against the head of the department of social studies and a member of the course committee.
The tribunal had decided there had been no prima facie case for the Trinity staff to meet in relation to any of the complaints.
Judge O'Hagan struck out the proceedings against the Equality Tribunal which investigates complaints under the Equal Status Act and the Equality Employment Act. He substituted Trinity College as the proper respondent to meet Mr Kelly's appeal.
Judge O'Hagan expunged 16 paragraphs included in affidavits sworn by Mr Kelly which the court held to contain "scandalous and unnecessary matter" not relevant to the facts of the appeal.
He also made an order restraining any publication regarding them. Mr Kelly told the court he did not think he had included unsubstantiated matter in his affidavits.