A teacher who sued St Gerard's private school in Bray has been awarded €15,000 damages by the High Court because of a failure by the school board to grant her a hearing before deciding not to offer her a permanent post.
However, Mr Justice Kevin Haugh ruled that the school's board of governors had been entitled to reach its decision not to continue Mary Hennessy's contract on April 29th, 2003.
Even if the opportunity was given to Ms Hennessy to address the board, it was very unlikely the outcome would have been different, he said yesterday. As he was satisfied as a matter of strong probability she would have been let go even had she been afforded the opportunity to which she was entitled, the sum of €15,000 was an appropriate measure of compensation.
The issue of who will pay the costs of the six-day action will be decided next week.
Ms Hennessy, Quill Road, Kilmacanogue, Co Wicklow, was a maths and business organisation teacher at the school from August 2002 and claimed she took the position on the basis it was permanent.
However, in March 2003 reference was made to a probationary period and, at the end of April 2003, she received a letter from the chairperson of the St Gerard's board informing her the board did not intend to offer a contract of continuous employment at the end of her probationary period.
In the proceedings, she had sought a declaration that she was a full-time teacher at St Gerard's and an order permitting her to return to her post. She also sought damages for alleged breach of contract and alleged loss of reputation.
In his reserved judgment yesterday, Mr Justice Haugh said he was persuaded Ms Hennessy knew she was being retained on a probationary contract and that she had accepted the offer of employment knowing there was to be a year's probation.
He said he was satisfied that in determining whether the teacher's services were satisfactory or otherwise, the board was not engaging in proceedings of a disciplinary nature.
No misconduct was ever alleged against Ms Hennessy. All that was at issue was her ability to teach and to control a sixth-year ordinary-level maths class to a satisfactory standard. This was a performance matter rather than a disciplinary issue.
The judge said he was satisfied certain agreements or understandings had been concluded between a school management organisation of which St Gerard's was a member, the JMB, and the ASTI (Association of Secondary Teachers of Ireland), which would have afforded a probationer the right to address the board.
Ms Hennessy had a right to a hearing as had been promised by the school principal, he found. It was abundantly clear Ms Hennessy believed the board would honour this promise before a decision was made.
Principal Gerry Foley was a careful, reliable and fair-minded witness who had not exaggerated any of the matters giving rise to his criticisms or misgivings relating to Ms Hennessy's performance as a teacher which ultimately caused him to recommend that the board should not grant her a permanent appointment, the judge said.
The judge said it was acknowledged that Ms Hennessy's record before she came to St Gerard's was exemplary. He was satisfied the tasks assigned to her were not unduly difficult or onerous and that the sixth-year maths class would not ordinarily be described as a problem class. It seemed to him, for whatever reason, Ms Hennessy had not retained the respect of the pupils in the class.
Mr Foley would have been reasonably entitled to conclude that her performance was not up to reasonable expectation and there was no evidence that the situation was about to be improved or remedied, the judge found. He was satisfied the decision by the board came solely from Mr Foley's recommendation and the board members were acquainted in general terms with the complaints. The board were the final arbiters of what constituted satisfactory service.