This Supreme Court case concerned a series of seemingly unremarkable events which cumulatively led to the plaintiff leaving work and failing to return due to alleged bullying and harassment. The core incident, concerning the locking of a classroom door with a pupil and teacher inside, was not in dispute. However, the subsequent events and procedures applied were.

The Court found that once the plaintiff had established that locking the classroom door from the inside was common practice then a question regarding the sanction to be imposed, if any, should have been raised. Similarly, they found that the plaintiff should have been afforded an opportunity to represent herself in front of the school Board.

The Court stated that it did not see anything malicious in the way the Board had conducted its procedures, but stressed that the Board who had made the original decision should not have heard the appeal of its own decision. The Court concluded that the facts did not give rise to a successful claim for bullying but, given the inadequate disciplinary procedures applied, the Court felt that the plaintiff should not be ordered to repay the defendant the sum of money received as a condition of obtaining the earlier partial stay, or costs.
http://www.courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/09859e7a3f34669680256ef3004a27de/b1dcacd9a80d9be98025812c003dcfd3?OpenDocument
 
This case will be discussed in detail by Marguerite Bolger SC and Claire Bruton BL at Legal-Island's Annual Reviews of Employment Law in November:
https://www.legal-island.ie/events/