THREE THIRD-LEVEL students have lost their High Court challenge to an “unfair and unjust” decision by Minister for Education Ruairí Quinn to cut their maintenance grants.
They argued that the Minister breached their legitimate expectation that, while remaining students in qualifying courses, they would be entitled to the non-adjacent grant due to their primary residence and distance from college.
In a reserved judgment yesterday, Mr Justice John Hedigan rejected their claims of a legitimate expectation their grants would not be cut.
Even if the students had such an expectation, the overwhelming considerations of the public interest would outweigh it given the dire financial circumstances facing Ireland when the decision was made, he said. The Minister’s actions to reduce expenditure and cut the grant had “a clear public policy basis”.
The judge also dismissed claims the changes breached sections of the Student Support Act 2011 or that the Minister acted in an unfair and unjust manner.
The action was brought by: Medb McCarthy, an arts student at NUI Galway, from Murtyclough, Burrin, Co Clare; Robert Johnson, studying business at Dundalk IT from Lattonalbany, Carrickmacross, Co Monaghan; and Iesha Rowan, a mature student in business studies at Galway-Mayo IT, from Ashbrook, Oranmore, Co Galway.
It was regarded as a test case on behalf of students attending third-level colleges nationwide and was supported by the Union of Students in Ireland.
The Minister denied the claims and his lawyers argued he was entitled to make the changes.
The students, who all live more than 24km from college, had sought to quash the decision to change the distance-from-college criteria. They also sought orders reducing the automatic eligibility of mature students to the higher non-adjacent rate of grant.
The changes were proposed by the previous government in December 2010 and implemented in the 2011 budget.
The students claimed they were due to get grants of about €6,100-€6,700 per year, but the cuts resulted in losses of €2,440-€3,900 each.
One of the main changes to the scheme was to double the distance from college required to qualify for the non-adjacent grant rate from 24km to 45km for existing and new applicants from September 2011.
The judge found the students did not have a legitimate expectation the rate of grant would continue in respect of each of them.
The students must have been aware of the deteriorating economic situation that had led to grants in the higher education sector being cut, he said. It was not reasonable to expect the regular practice in relation to grants would continue. Rejecting claims of a right to the same grant the students had received in 2010 as long as they continued on their courses, the judge said the schemes were annual and the wording of the 2010 scheme did not state it was to apply in the years 2011, 2012 or 2013. No scheme gives a guarantee as to the level of the future grant, he added.