A man who was harbourmaster at Foynes until his dismissal three years ago was not validly removed from the employment of Shannon Foynes Port Company, the Supreme Court decided yesterday.
The Supreme Court allowed an appeal against the High Court's rejection of claims by Capt Sean Histon and granted a declaration that he had not been validly removed from office "in the employment" of Shannon Foynes Port Co.
The decision means he can return to work with the company in a position of "officer" status.
Capt Histon (53) had appealed a High Court decision in July 2003 rejecting his application for a declaration that his purported removal from the service of the company without ministerial sanction breached a section of the Harbours Act and was null and void.
Giving the reserved judgment of the Supreme Court yesterday, Mr Justice Geoghegan said he would allow the appeal in the sense that he would set aside the High Court's order and substitute a declaration that Capt Histon had not been validly removed from office in the company's employment.
Having regard to the court's interpretation of a section of the Harbours Act, 1996, it followed, notwithstanding that Capt Histon ceased to be a harbourmaster, that he continued to have officer status and to be in a position from which he could not be dismissed without the sanction of the Minister of the Marine, which was not sought or obtained.
It seemed clear he had never been validly removed and was still in office.
Mr Justice Geoghegan, with whose judgment Mr Justice Fennelly and Mr Justice Kearns agreed, said that once an agreement could not be reached on a settlement package, the employer should have clarified properly what the terms and conditions of Capt Histon's employment were going to be and the work to be assigned to him.
This, of course, would not necessarily mean that he could not be assigned to different work in the future, but it would have to be work reasonably compatible with his "officer" status in the company and his experience as a former harbourmaster. It would necessarily have to be a named post.
Foynes Port Co and Shannon Estuary Port Co were amalgamated under new legislation in 2000.
Capt Histon was with the Foynes company while the other company also had a harbourmaster, who was the successful applicant for the office with the new Shannon Estuary Port Co.
This meant that Capt Histon no longer held the title of harbourmaster.
Mr Justice Geoghegan said the primary concern of Capt Histon was what might be described as a "status" concern in as much as he insisted that whatever duties he had to perform for the new company were to be on the basis that he would be reporting directly to the new chief executive and not to the harbourmaster.
After willingly giving advice in the early days to the harbourmaster of the amalgamated company, who had always been a friend of his, he effectively stopped reporting for work while still drawing his salary and claiming he had not been offered a post suitable to his station and reporting to the chief executive.
Correspondence and discussions culminated in a letter of August 1st, 2001, requiring Capt Histon to report for duty by a particular date and to take on assignments including special projects.
It was clear, however, that he would not be reporting to the chief executive. Capt Histon failed to comply with that letter and was dismissed.
Mr Justice Geoghegan said that, essentially, the issue on the appeal was whether he was properly dismissed or not.