Enoch Burke will be asked to identify the mystery owner of the car used to bring him to school

THE HIGH COURT has asked Enoch Burke to identify the owner of a car used to bring him to Wilson’s Hospital School, as it considers whether the vehicle should be seized.

Judge Brian Cregan said there were a number of steps to be taken before the court could decide whether to lift a stay on an earlier order for the sequestration, or seizure, of the car.

The judge initially made an order last month that the car should be seized because it was enabling Burke to trespass on the grounds of his former employer.

Burke has since told solicitors for the school’s board of management that he does not own the vehicle.

Judge Cregan then said that if someone else owns the car, the question could arise whether that person was “aiding and abetting contempt of court”.

The judge therefore asked the board’s solicitors in the High Court today to write to Burke to ask him to disclose the owner’s identity.

If he does not, Judge Cregan said the minister for transport could be joined to the case to determine the owner of the vehicle.

Burke, who did not attend today’s hearing, has been the subject of a permanent injunction preventing him from entering the Co Westmeath school’s grounds.

Last month, Cregan ordered his arrest and committal to prison for breaching that order. The judge subsequently amended the order so that Burke would face arrest if he appeared at or within 100 metres of the school.

Burke has spent more than 700 days in prison across five periods of imprisonment for contempt of court. He was most recently released in July after the school year ended.

He maintains that his dispute with the school arises from his religious opposition to an instruction to address a transgender student by their preferred pronouns.

Judges have repeatedly said his imprisonment concerns his refusal to obey court orders to stay away from the school.

Car ownership

Mallon told the court today that Burke had not attended the school since last week’s hearing.

She said that, after the updated arrest order was provided to the superintendent at Mullingar garda station, he sought clarification on whether the 100-metre limit referred to the school building or its grounds.

Advertisement

Cregan said Burke could be arrested and committed to prison if he trespassed on the grounds, appeared at the front gate or came within 100 metres of the school gate.

The court then considered the earlier order to seize the vehicle used to bring Burke to Wilson’s.

Cregan said: “There is probably a process that has to be gone through before the court lifts any stay on the order of sequestration.”

Niall Ó hUiginn, counsel for receiver Miles Kirby, said the National Vehicle and Driver File was held by the Department of Transport, but that only a limited number of entities were entitled to obtain information from it.

He said Kirby was willing to be appointed as a sequestrator, but the judge said that might not be necessary at this stage.

Cregan said identifying the car’s owner would be the first step and that the next question would be whether that person was aiding and abetting contempt of court, followed by a hearing to determine that issue.

If a finding was made, the court would then have to consider what should happen, he said.

If a fine was imposed and remained unpaid, the car might need to be seized.

Cregan said the options for identifying the owner included asking Burke directly or joining the minister for transport to the case and potentially seeking an order for disclosure of the information.

He asked the board’s solicitors to write to Burke first. If the information was not provided, he said, the department would be joined to the case.

Payment and costs

The court also heard that a €433 payment due to Burke under a local bargaining agreement had been sent to the receiver.

Counsel for the Department of Education said the small amount could be passed to the Courts Fines Office.

Cregan also addressed the receiver’s costs, saying they should be paid by the Courts Fines Office because the receiver had been appointed by the court.

The court heard that the receiver’s professional fees amounted to €12,300.

Ó hUiginn initially indicated that these had been paid, but clarified before the hearing ended that they had not.

A separate bill of costs is to be prepared, and the court will receive an update when the case returns on 19 November.