The Equality Tribunal rejected Mr and Mrs X’s claims that a post-primary school discriminated against their son, Mr Y, because of his disability. In a decision dated 14 May 2010, Equality Officer Enda Murphy also rejected their claims of harassment and victimisation and found the school had not failed to accommodate the student’s special educational needs.
The family said the school had not adequately met Mr Y’s needs, including by delaying a psychological assessment and failing to provide suitable learning support. The school said it had provided support and other measures, and denied the allegations.
The officer found that the school provided learning support and later introduced an Individual Education Plan, a special needs assistant, a reduced curriculum and more resource teaching. He concluded that the measures were reasonable in the circumstances. He found no evidence that the school’s response to the student’s behaviour was connected to his disability. The assistant’s photograph of Mr Y in class was improper, but the officer found no evidence that it was motivated by or connected to his disability. He accepted the school’s explanation for a class meeting and Mr Y’s non-selection for the hurling team, and found no victimisation.