The High Court has dismissed an application for an injunction preventing notification to the Garda vetting bureau of concerns over a male teacher’s relationship with a former student.
Mr Justice Senan Allen said there was “abundant justification for the concern” raised following an investigation into the teacher’s relationship with the 19-year-old male student as a result of which the Teaching Council decided it should notify the National Vetting Bureau (NVB). There has never been any justification for the allegation that the council’s concern is not a “bona fide” one, he said.
Last year, the teacher got a temporary injunction restraining the council making a notification under the 2012 Vetting Bureau Act. He sought to make the injunction permanent. In opposing the application, the council said it was obliged to notify the bureau of its concerns.
The case arose out of complaints about the teacher’s conduct towards the student over alleged incidents in November 2016.
The allegations included the student was allowed consume alcohol while he was alone with the teacher and that the teacher was under the influence of alcohol to the degree he was incapable of discharging his duties.
In November 2016, the student was found by gardaí in a distressed state on a motorway and brought back to the school. Gardaí said the student became more distressed when approached by the teacher. The student told gardaí and the school principal the teacher had tried to remove his tracksuit bottoms and became angry when the student refused to let him. When he was found on the motorway, he said he was trying to get to Dublin Airport so he could go home to his native country.
The student also reported he had previously smoked something other than cigarettes with the teacher. It is also alleged the teacher sent the student messages requesting the student to retract the information he provided to gardaí and the principal.
He had been told not to contact the student. Following an inquiry, the Teaching Council concluded the public interest was served by requesting the teacher not to repeat the conduct. The teacher gave such undertakings and apologised for any distress caused.
The council did not proceed with allegations of sexual impropriety by the teacher, which were denied.
In his High Court action, the teacher claimed, arising out of the investigation, the Teaching Council wanted to send a notification concerning the teacher to the NVB which was flawed and breached his rights.
In his judgment, Mr Justice Allen said rules were in place to ensure information gathered by the NVB will not be disclosed except in cases where there is a genuine concern the subject of the information may harm a child or vulnerable person.
When the notification is made about the teacher, he will have all the safeguards contained under law, he added.