JR17's Application No. 1 (Education)
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | Weatherup J |
| Judgment Date | 2007 |
| Neutral Citation | [2007] NIQB 107 |
| Date | 06 December 2007 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Northern Ireland) |
Neutral Citation no. [2007] NIQB 107 Ref:
WEAC5959
Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down Delivered:
06/12/2007
(subject to editorial corrections)*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION (JUDICIAL REVIEW)
________
AN APPLICATION BY JR17 (EDUCATION)
FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW
________
WEATHERUP J
The Application
[1] This is an application for judicial review of the decisions of the
Principal of a school and the North Eastern Education and Library Board
suspending the applicant from the school. The applicant’s challenge is
directed at two main areas, namely the decisions of the Principal and the
Board in relation to the suspension of the applicant from the school and the
arrangements for the tuition of the applicant over the period of his absence
from school. Ms Quinlivan appeared for the applicant and Mr McLaughlin
appeared for the respondents.
Background
[2] The applicant was informed by the Principal on 7 February 2007 that
he was being suspended for a period of 5 days. This suspension continued
for further 5 day periods until 13 March 2007 and home tuition was provided
by the school. From 13 March 2007 the applicant was marked in the school
register as “educated off site” and home tuition was provided by the Board.
By letter of 20 April 2007 the applicant was advised that he was permitted to
attend school in order to study and sit exams.
[3] The background to the applicant’s suspension was as follows. On 31
January 2007 the Principal was informed by a female pupil in the school that
she was terrified by the applicant. The complainant did not wish to make any
2
formal complaint against the applicant and did not wish the Principal to tell
the applicant what she had reported as she was in fear. She reported conduct
on the part of the applicant both inside and outside the school which was
causing her deep distress. Later that same day a friend of the female pupil
approached the Principal and informed him that the female pupil was in deep
distress, had low self-esteem and there were concerns that she was possibly
suicidal. This friend also gave the Principal further details of the nature of the
applicant’s behaviour within the school which had been causing the female
pupil so much distress. At this time the applicant was not attending school as
he was on a work placement but the female pupil was distressed and fearful
at the prospect of his return to school the following week.
[4] The Principal contacted the female pupil’s mother who confirmed that
she also was deeply concerned about her daughter’s state of mind and also
confirmed that the applicant’s behaviour was the cause of her daughter’s
distress.
[5] The Principal made contact with the Board’s Child Protection Officer
and discussed the report which had been made to him and the possible threat
of self-harm.
[6] On 1 February 2007 the vice-principal of the school attended a
multidisciplinary case conference in relation to the applicant which had been
organised by Social Services entirely independently of the complaint made to
the Principal by the female pupil. The applicant’s mother and grandmother
were in attendance at that meeting, as were other professionals, including the
Police Service of Northern Ireland. At this meeting the vice-principal was
informed of three separate allegations of indecent assault, threatening
behaviour and aggravated assault on females by the applicant which were the
subject of criminal proceedings. All of these allegations concerned incidents
which had taken place outside the school. In addition there was information
regarding an allegation that the applicant had indecent photographs of a
female pupil on his mobile telephone.
[7] The vice-principal informed the Principal of these allegations on 2
February 2007. The Principal contacted the Child Protection Officer and was
advised that a risk assessment meeting should take place within the school.
The risk assessment meeting took place on 6 February 2007, attended by the
Principal, the Board’s child protection officer, representatives from social
services and PSNI. The purpose of the meeting was to share concerns about
risks to children in the school in view of the complaint by the female pupil
and the police investigations into the other events. It was decided that Social
Services should carry out an assessment of the allegations concerning the
female pupil and of its impact on her emotions. It was further decided that the
applicant should be suspended from school for 5 days, with the possibility of
extension, while the assessment took place. The minutes of the meeting state
To continue reading
Request your trial
4 cases
-
Queen v Clarke (Michael Patrick) and McStravick (Stephen Paul) Ruling No. 1: Discharge of Jury
...[2008] NICC 6, paragraphs [45] – [50] especially. Other decisions belonging to this sphere include The Queen –v- Mackle and Others [2007] NIQB 107 and The Queen –v- Lewis and Others [2008] NICC 16. It is trite that where an application of this kind is made, an asserted risk to the fairness ......
-
Queen v Jones (Gary)
...6, paragraphs [45] – [50] especially. Other Northern Ireland decisions belonging to this sphere include Regina –v- Mackle and Others [2007] NIQB 107 and Regina –v- Lewis and Others [2008] NICC 16. In England, there is a noteworthy contribution to this subject in The Queen –v- Weston Justice......
-
Asia Television Ltd v Communications Authority (Successor Of The Broadcasting Authority
...63. In this regard, Mr Yu added among other cases two decisions of Weatherup J in Re JR 17’s Application for Judicial Review (education) [2007] NIQB 107 at paras [37] to [43] and Re Hart’s Application for Judicial Review [2009] NIQB 57[38]. In the latter case, which was in the context of pr......
-
Queen v James Oliver Meehan , Brenda Dolores Meehan & Sean Anthony Devenney
...Others [2008] NICC 6, paragraphs [45] – [50] especially. Other decisions belonging to this sphere include Regina –v- Maccle and Others [2007] NIQB 107 and Regina –v- Lewis and Others [2008] NICC 16. 5 [11] It is trite that where an application of this kind is made, an asserted risk to the f......