A hearing of the case of schoolteacher Enoch Burke against Wilson’s Hospital School was suspended after Burke refused to refrain from interrupting.
During the hearing, Burke’s mother and sister were also removed from the court amid continued interruptions and speaking out of turn.
During the hearing before Mr. Justice Brian Cregan, Mr. Burke was warned that if he persisted in interrupting by speaking out of turn, he would be returned to Mountjoy Prison to allow for the hearing to resume via videolink.
After Mr. Burke continued to interrupt by cutting across counsel for Wilson’s Hospital School, Ms. Rosemary Mallon BL, he was immediately retired to Mountjoy approximately ten minutes into the hearing.
Justice Cregan also directed that Mr Burke’s mother, Martina and sister, Ammi, be “attached”, or arrested, by gardaí; however the arrest was not effected.
The case was adjourned until 2 pm, with mother and daughter prevented from entering the courtroom. Both stood outside.
After the case resumed, with Mr. Burke on videolink from prison, he was muted after a short time when he interrupted the judge again. Justice Cregan requested that the registrar “Please mute Mr Burke, please.”
The judge told Mr. Burke, “Your behaviour is absolutely disgraceful”, “completely unacceptable in a court of law”, and “absolutely manifestly an abuse of process”.
Ms Mallon’s application was that the school be joined as a notice party to proceedings taken by Mr. Burke, who had sought an interlocutory injunction against a Disciplinary Appeals Panel formed by the ASTI, alleging that there was a bias against him.
The three-member panel convened last December to consider whether the sacking of Mr. Burke from the school was justified.
When Burke interrupted Justice Cregan again, the court requested that the registrar “Please mute Mr Burke, please.”
It was the position of counsel for the DAP, Padraic Lyons SC, that because two members of the panel have now resigned, Mr. Burke’s applications were “moot”.
Just over a fortnight ago, a previous sitting heard that two members of the panel, Jack Cleary, a nominee of the Joint Managerial Body for Voluntary Secondary Schools, and chairman Sean Ó Longáin, had resigned
Mr. Burke argued that the third member of the DAP, appointed by the ASTI, Ms. Geraldine O’Brien, had not resigned from the panel and that his application therefore had merit.
Mr. Lyons pointed to Section 1a of a “circular” related to the organisation of the panel, which stated that no member of the new panel, yet to be appointed, could have had any prior dealings with the case and that therefore any apprehension that O’Brien’s alleged bias could not affect a new panel.
Mr. Burke continued to repeatedly insist that O’Brien had not resigned, saying, she “is on the panel, she has not resigned from the panel,” that there was “no indication that she will be resigning” and that “the panel exists and she is on it.”
Judge Cregan referred to a letter from McGuinness Solicitors that their client, O’Brien, accepts that she can have no further dealings with the DAP, which he said was “crystal clear”.
Burke had also sought an injunction to prevent the members of the now “dissolved” three-member panel from making any recommendations.
Mr Justice Cregan said that, because none of the members of the triune panel, O’Brien, Ó Longáin, or Cleary, could now have any involvement in a new panel, or the forming of a new panel, the reliefs Mr. Burke sought were also moot.
Mr. Burke, when unmuted, protested, accusing the court of having “made a decision without me having an opportunity to make submissions”.
He argued that “the issue is the timing” of the school’s application, which he called “an abuse of power”.
Justice Cregan accused Burke of creating “a storm” in order to “delay proceedings”, asking him to “please focus your remarks on whether this case is moot”.
Burke protested that he had only seen a letter from McGuinness Solicitors asking the ASTI “did they have anything to say”, “this morning”, claiming that O’Brien was “still” the “nominee” of the ASTI.
When the judge said that he had seen the letter, Burke said, “Is it just there that you’ve seen it when it was handed up to you?
Justice Cregan replied that it was “sent to the court yesterday”.
After Burke referred to an order made by Justice Conor Dignam in 2023, he was asked to “please get to the point” about today’s proceedings.
Justice Cregan assured Burke that “there will be a new panel” with “entirely new members”, again asking him to make his point.
To this, Burke said, “Please have the good graces to let me finish my point” before the judge replied, “That’s a little bit rich coming from you, given that you and your family have continued to interrupt these proceedings to the point where they had to be abandoned.”
“Is it one rule for you and your family and another rule for everyone else?” Justice Cregan asked.
After Burke insisted that O’Brien was to have no involvement with his case going forward, the judge repeated that it was “crystal clear” that she could not have any further involvement.
Mr. Lyons said that it is “clear that he [Burke] does not need injunctive relief because the letter makes it clear that she cannot have further involvement.”
When Ms Mallon was asked to make the position of the school clear, she was almost immediately interrupted by Isaac Burke, who was standing holding a bundle of documents.
Justice Cregan said, “Isaac Burke, please leave the courtroom,” to which Isaac said, “This is unacceptable,’.
After Isaac failed to leave the courtroom when directed, he was forcibly removed by two members of An Garda Síochána, amidst which he started to shout, “Help!, help!, help!”.
After more arguments about the position of Ms O’Brien, Justice Cregan repeated again that it was “Crystal clear reliefs from injunctions in the plenary summits are moot”, saying that the “court does not intend to take up precious judicial time” with the application.
“I am satisfied that these proceedings are moot,” he said.
As to the matter of costs, Mr. Lyons submitted that Mr. Burke should be allowed his expenses up until the 4th of February, saying that he had been put on notice that costs would arise if he decided to bring today’s application to court despite the arguments that it was in substance moot.
Burke continued to insist that O’Brien “has not resigned”, adding, “That is a nefarious ruling”.
Ms. Mallon indicated that she would not be seeking her costs for today’s appearance.
Burke addressed Justice Cregan, saying, “My family have been treated disgracefully by you and the guards,”.
The judge replied, “As usual, not addressing the issues”.
Before the convulsion of the hearing, Mr. Burke requested that transcripts from a previous DAP hearing be referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions for alleged perjury.
Referring to the legal precedent of Faherty J., Justice Cregan said, “I do not intend to make any order for his costs”.
Mr. Burke’s applications were struck out, with the court urging both counsels to expedite the appointment of a new panel, noting that Mr. Burke is “languishing in jail”.
He said that it was not appropriate that panel members could only meet on Saturdays, and urged that members be made available to sit “from Monday to Saturday”.
Justice Cregan also recommended that a stenographer be appointed, as there was a “divergence of views in the affidavits” that should be addressed.