Costly legal cases against the State are diverting money from the provision of services for children with special educational needs, the Minister for Education has said.
Ms Hanafin issued a statement following the conclusion of an unsuccessful High Court action by the parents of Richard Clare, now 18, who has Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The Clares had claimed the State had failed to provide early and appropriate education for their son.
The minister said that while she did not want to penalise the parents by seeking costs in this case, she felt it was important to highlight to solicitors that "unjustified" claims are "an abuse of the legal process" and would be at their own expense.
Lawyers for the Minister for Education and the State told the High Court today they will not be seeking costs, estimated at more than €1 million following the 16-day action.
Ms Hanafin said this evening: "This case involved a young man with an attention disorder (ADHD) for whom every possible educational provision was made by the Department.
"Richard was very successful in his Leaving Certificate, gaining 360 points. I understand he is now pursuing his education in a third-level computer course and I wish him every success," she said.
"As recognised by Mr Justice Smyth in his judgement on this case, the Department put in place all the appropriate services to meet Richard's educational needs, including providing private tuition."
However, the minister added that the decision to pursue the case for 16 days in the High Court "naturally resulted in considerable legal costs".
"I am concerned that such legal cases are costly and are diverting money from the provision of services for children with special educational needs.
"The position of the Department of Education having being upheld in this case, it was open to the Department to apply for its costs to be met by the plaintiff. While I did not want to penalise the parents by seeking costs in this case, I feel it is important to highlight to solicitors that unjustified claims are an abuse of the legal process and will be at their own expense and that not of the State."
The minister added: "In taking my decision I have had regard to the prospect of actually recovering costs as well as the impending establishment of alternative routes for parents to appeal against allocated provision with the enactment of the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act, 2004."
In the High Court, the teenager's parents Richard and Anne Clare had claimed the State had failed over years to provide early and appropriate education for their son, but that claim was dismissed on all grounds by Mr Justice Smyth in a lengthy judgment last July.
Last week, Mr John O'Donnell SC, for the Minister and State, told the judge his side would be seeking costs of the action.
However, in court today, Mr Paul O'Higgins SC, with Mr O'Donnell SC, for the Minister and State, said the State was not applying for its costs. He stressed, the decision not to seek costs should "not be considered a precedent".
Counsel for the South Eastern Health Board, which also successfully defended the case, said the board too would not be applying for costs but also would not like the case to be seen as a precedent. The findings of the court were "a very clear vindication" of the board's position, he said.
Mr Paul Sreenan SC, with Mr Frank Callanan SC, for the Clares, said there was no application for costs by his side.
Mr Justice Smyth said that, if there was no application for costs, there would be no order for costs. The parties had outlined their positions, he added.
The absence of any order for costs means each side will now meet its own costs.
The State's costs are estimated at more than €1 million but it is unclear if the Clares, who were represented by the Cork legal firm, Ernest Cantillon and Company, two senior and one junior counsel, will be met with a bill from their lawyers.
The judge said he was very anxious to know how Richard had performed in the Leaving Certificate, which he had sat last June. Mr Sreenan said Richard had secured 360 points and was pursuing studies in the Waterford Institute of Technology.
Mr Justice Smyth said he was "absolutely delighted" for Richard. He noted he had heard evidence from experts called by Richard's side during the case to the effect that the boy was at risk of failing his Leaving Certificate.
He said he was also absolutely delighted that Richard was succeeding from his mother's point of view, given that she had said she had been told that Richard would "run out" of a school where a place was found for him. It was clear Richard had benefitted from good teaching, the judge added.