DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS IN THE STATE EDUCATION SYSTEM IN NEW ZEALAND
| Pages | 133-141 |
| Published date | 01 January 1977 |
| Date | 01 January 1977 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb009771 |
| Author | G.A. CRISP |
| Subject Matter | Education |
THE JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION
VOLUME XV, NUMBER 1 MAY, 1977
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS IN THE STATE
EDUCATION SYSTEM IN NEW ZEALAND
G. A. CRISP
The paper briefly outlines the legal procedures involved in a hearing by the Teachers Court
of Appeal of
an
appeal by a teacher against dismissal. It discusses the duty of
an
employing
authority to dismiss a teacher who is unsatisfactory and the general circumstances in which
such a duty may arise. The obligations of the employing authority to the teacher which run
with the duty are also examined, particularly the duty to act fairly. Arising from this, con-
sideration is given to the procedure by which dismissal should be carried out. The principal
conclusion offered by the paper is that since this duty to act fairly is not only a moral one,
but also apparently a legal obligation, it should not only be a basis for any decision to ter-
minate the employment of a teacher but should be capable of being shown to hate been so.
In such circumstances, not only will "justice have been done, it will also be seen to have been
done."
INTRODUCTION
The Teachers' Court of Appeal was constituted by Regulations1 made
under the Education Act 19642 to act as a final appeal authority for
teachers who had been subject to dismissal or other disciplinary
proceedings. The Court comprises a Chairman who is a Magistrate, and
one nominee each of the employing authority and the appropriate staff
as-
sociation. These nominees may not be serving teachers or members of the
Board of the employing authority. The Court has virtually all of the
powers of
a
normal court, including the power to require the attendance of
witnesses, the production of documents, the awarding of costs, and like
matters. While the Court has wide powers to regulate its own proceedings,
there is a tendency to follow normal judicial procedures but with a reduc-
tion in formalities.
However, an interesting and important variation upon the normal
procedure in a court of
law,
is that the employing authority states its case
and adduces its supporting evidence before the appellant is heard.3 (That
this is of considerable consequence
was
demonstrated in White's case.)4 As
is usual with Court proceedings, they are required to be in public unless
both parties agree otherwise.
The Court is required to "hear and determine the appeal according to
equity and good conscience",5 and its decision is final and binding on both
parties.6
G.A. CRISP is Head of
the
Department of Accountancy and Law at Mitchell College of
Ad-
vanced Education. Prior to his present appointment Mr. Crisp was Senior Lecturer in Finan-
cial Management and Business Law, Massey University. He has published extensively in the
business and financial field.
To continue reading
Request your trial