A primary school child with additional needs living in Dublin has lost a High Court challenge over delays of up to a year in providing him with a transport service to school.
While the delays were frustrating for the boy and his family, there was nothing to suggest any conscious or deliberate flouting of rights, Ms Justice Marguerite Bolger said.
A “proactive and reactive” approach was adopted by the Minister for Education, despite practical challenges posed by unsuccessful transport escort recruitment processes and delays due to legal obligations including procurement rules and Garda vetting requirements.
The delay was due to “genuine difficulties” that the relevant personnel are actively seeking to address and suitable alternative supports – a school transport grant and home tuition grant – were offered as a temporary measure.
READ MORE
While refusing to declare the Minister had not complied with her statutory obligation to provide a school transport service for a child with disabilities or other special educational needs, the judge said the delay in securing services cannot be “unlimited”.
If a transport service is not in place by September, as expected, the child can reapply to the court, she said.
In her judgment published on Monday, the judge noted school transport is administered by a Department of Education non-statutory scheme.
The child lives with his family in Dublin and had difficulties with previous school placements. After his parents accepted a July 2024 offer of a place, they sent a completed school transport application form on July 13th, 2024 to a special education needs officer but it was not provided to the relevant section of the Department of Education until September 4th. The form referred to the child’s anxiety causing “meltdowns and outbursts when triggered” and said an escort would be required to prevent danger to the driver.
On September 25th, Bus Éireann advised the department a driver service was required, which the department sanctioned a week later.
A procurement process, required under European law, involved the route being put to tender five times before a successful bidder was appointed on March 3rd.
The child’s mother was sanctioned for a home tuition grant that was ultimately not availed of as she said sourcing a suitable tutor would take considerable time. She was paying for private dyslexia reading lessons since the previous October.
On March 3rd, a transport service was put in place and the school was responsible for employing the escort. One was hired on April 2nd and, after Garda vetting, began employment on May 6th.
The transport service involved the boy and two other children with additional needs being transported by a driver and accompanied by the escort in a saloon car.
On May 12th, the school principal informed the department the other two children had become dysregulated during the journey, partly due to limited space in the car, and expressed concern the school would lose the escort. She said the boy could not attend school until a new escort was recruited.
The escort resigned two days later, the judge noted. The department then sanctioned an individualised transport service for the boy, available from May 25th, subject to getting an escort.
That proved difficult, and a temporary arrangement was made to have a post-primary escort who, after Garda vetting, was available for two weeks in July.
The department’s reasonable expectation was that an escort would be in place for the new school year commencing in September, the judge said.
As there is no “firm arrangement” in place, the issues raised in the proceedings are not moot or pointless, and the application can be renewed if the service is not available, she said.
