Enoch Burke court

Mr Burke has been fined €700 each day he has attended Wilson's Hospital School in Co Westmeath, in breach of a court order.

The legal team for Wilson’s Hospital School told the court that “Mr Burke does not listen”. “(The email said) ‘It is expected of you’. In his appeal to the court, Mr Burke said he could not accept “transgenderism” due to his Christian beliefs, after teachers at the school were asked to address a student by “a new name and the ‘they’ pronoun”. Mr Birmingham said the court would hear Mr Burke’s appeal against the decisions of High Court judges Ms Justice Siobhan Stack and Mr Justice Max Barrett, “notwithstanding the fact that we were unimpressed” that Mr Burke did not indicate whether he would continue to be in contempt of court. President of the Court of Appeal, Justice George Birmingham, said it was “a matter of some importance” whether Mr Burke intended to continue his “ongoing” contempt by attending the school despite a High Court order against it. On Thursday morning, the three-panel court said it had concerns about hearing an appeal if Mr Burke intended to continue to be in contempt, but decided to continue to hear the case.

The Court of Appeal will proceed with an appeal by Enoch Burke against High Court orders, including an injunction to stay away from Wilson's Hospital School ...

Mr Justice Birmingham said a situation where the person appealing had not obeyed court orders and said they would not be obeying them and yet was seeking orders the other side had to obey would be a very imbalanced situation indeed and one which the court could not countenance. On Monday, the Court of Appeal sat briefly where Mr Justice Birmingham told Mr Burke that the judges wanted to flag with him that it should not be assumed an appeal would be entertained by the court from someone who was still in contempt. President of the Court of Appeal Mr Justice George Birmingham said the court sees difficulty in embarking on an appeal in a situation where there is ongoing disobedience with court orders, which include staying away from the school.

The court today heard the appeal of Enoch Burke against an injunction taken against him by Wilson's Hospital School.

“(The email said) ‘It is expected of you’. In his appeal to the court, Burke said he could not accept “transgenderism” due to his Christian beliefs, after teachers at the school were asked to address a student by “a new name and the ‘they’ pronoun”. Birmingham said the court would hear Burke’s appeal against the decisions of High Court judges Ms Justice Siobhan Stack and Mr Justice Max Barrett, “notwithstanding the fact that we were unimpressed” that Burke did not indicate whether he would continue to be in contempt of court. President of the Court of Appeal, Justice George Birmingham, said it was “a matter of some importance” whether Burke intended to continue his “ongoing” contempt by attending the school despite a High Court order against it. The court has heard Burke argue that he has breached “no valid” court order, and also that the order was “manifestly unconstitutional and unlawful”. TEACHER ENOCH BURKE has told the Court of Appeal that “the only thing the State is bound to honour by the constitution is religion”.

A court has heard the appeal of Irish schoolteacher Enoch Burke against an injunction taken against him by a Co Westmeath school, despite concerns about his ...

"(The email said) 'It is expected of you'. The court also heard there was a school midterm break this week; Mr Burke did not indicate to the court whether he intended to continue to be in contempt of court by attending Wilson's Hospital School. In his appeal to the court, Mr Burke said he could not accept "transgenderism" due to his Christian beliefs, after teachers at the school were asked to address a student by "a new name and the 'they' pronoun". Mr Birmingham said the court would hear Mr Burke's appeal against the decisions of High Court judges Ms Justice Siobhan Stack and Mr Justice Max Barrett, "notwithstanding the fact that we were unimpressed" that Mr Burke did not indicate whether he would continue to be in contempt of court. On Thursday morning, the three-panel court said it had concerns about hearing an appeal if Mr Burke intended to continue to be in contempt, but decided to continue to hear the case. The court has heard Mr Burke argue that he has breached "no valid" court order, and also that the order was "manifestly unconstitutional and unlawful".

Mr Burke claims that the orders, which underpin a finding that he was in contempt of court resulting in his incarceration for 108 days, are unconstitutional, ...

He asked if the court was going to make any findings on decisions made by other judges, Ms Justice Eileen Roberts and Mrs Justice Conor Dignam, in relation to the dispute. Mr Justice Birmingham said it was not up to the court to advise Mr Burke, but said that the court would consider any relevant argument made by the teacher. He said that was not a relevant consideration and that the case before the court was all about the "unlawful and unconstitutional," demand made on him by the school. In his submissions Mr Burke re-iterated that the school's direction to him was to refer to a student, who he accepted was not in his classes but was somebody that he may have had interactions with in the school, by a different name and by the pronoun they. Mr Burke, counsel said, has appealed that decision. His appeal centres around a number of orders made by a judge of the High Court last September, in a case he claims centres around his objection to the school's direction to refer to a student at the Co Westmeath school by a different name using the pronoun 'they.'