Wilson’s Hospital v Enoch Burke-is there any equivalence in the conduct of the parties?

A commenter on my YouTube channel last week remarked that the conduct of both parties in the Wilson’s Hospital School dispute with Enoch Burke was poor and neither was more ‘righteous’ than the other.

My reply was that there was no equivalence to be found between the conduct of both parties if you have any interest in or respect for the rule of law.

For 6 High Court judges to date have found in favour of the school in various pre-trial motions and applications for orders and have found against Enoch Burke.

You have the two judges who made orders against Burke in the first place, Mr Justice Moore who imposed the fine on Burke for attending the school and ‘egregious breach’ of court orders.

And then you had the 3 Court of Appeal judges. All found in favour of the school and against Burke.

The score to date is 6-0 to the school.

The decision of Justice Alexander Owens is awaited in respect of the substantive issue between the parties-that is, was the school justified in suspending Burke. And perhaps this decision will be a game changer and raise questions about the other 6 decisions.

But until that happens there is no equivalence between the conduct of the parties.