Professor Philip Nolan is challenging a judge’s denial to extend a prohibiting order that prevents his termination from Science Foundation Ireland (SFI), progressing his broader High Court case. On Thursday, Justice Rory Mulcahy lifted a prior directive that had solidified Professor Nolan’s role as Director General at the state-backed research agency for five weeks.
He denied a request from Professor Nolan’s legal team to alter this ruling so that, during his appeal, SFI would be halted from regarding him as fired in regards to a particular legal stipulation. The judge suggested this plea could be considered by the Court of Appeal.
SFI sought the disbursement of its legal charges, however, Justice Mulcahy concurred with Mr Padraic Lyons SC’s argument, who was representing Professor Nolan, that the concern of lawyers’ fees should be determined by the outcome of the comprehensive case trial. This resolution was warranted since the focal points of the preliminary restraining order application will remain core to the main trial. In the event that Professor Nolan wins his overall case, it could potentially be unfair to require him to compensate for this unsuccessful application, the judge elucidated.
Earlier, Mr Lyons, advised by Daniel Spring & Co Solicitors, made known his client’s wish to appeal the judgement from June 21st, which denied him an injunction that could have been in place until the case’s conclusion. As part of his submission, he quoted the judge’s previous statement referring to the “formidable hurdle” Professor Nolan had to overcome to demonstrate he possessed a “strong case likely to succeed”.
Mr. Lyons highlighted the judge explicitly stating that he was unable to resolve any factual discrepancies in the pretrial application. He pointed to how the perspective on the dismissal drastically altered when SFI presented the court with testimonies stating the termination was due to dysfunction within the organisation, rather than any misconduct on Professor Nolan’s part. Mr. Lyons argued there were no board minutes or notes to back up this termination rationale.
Finally, on behalf of SFI, Mark Connaughton SC, under the instruction of McCann Fitzgerald solicitors, urged the court not to meddle with the current orders and to nullify the previous injunction. He firmly believed the plaintiff had abjectly failed to put forward a strong case with a high likelihood of success in the upcoming trial and did not satisfy the secondary limb of the legal test.
Professor Nolan’s request for an injunction appeal is set to be heard before the High Court case resumes in December, following an update on the progress of document sharing in readiness for the full trial. The judge has revoked his previous injunction. The court has to determine whether Prof Nolan was wrongfully dismissed on grounds of misconduct, which would entitle him to fair procedures, despite SFI’s assertion that the termination was in line with his contract terms. Notably, the termination letter fails to provide a clear explanation for the dismissal, although SFI’s court statements maintain that the dismissal was not due to misconduct.
Justice Mulcahy previously declined to issue the injunction, noting that Prof Nolan’s director general contract permitted the SFI board to sack him without providing any reason. The judge also suggested that the decision to terminate Prof Nolan might have been linked to the disruptions triggered by misconduct allegations lodged against him by five top-ranking staff members in December. However, the present evidence does not substantiate Prof Nolan’s claim that he was fired for misconduct, although this might change during the full trial.
Prof Nolan was relieved of his duties on May 27 following an inquiry by a barrister into the allegations made in December. Although the investigation did not find the director general guilty, it concluded that his conduct was improper and could form the basis for allegations of gross misconduct. Prof Nolan vehemently denies these accusations and insists that he should have had the opportunity to challenge these allegations through a disciplinary process, which was never initiated prior to his dismissal.
SFI argues that Prof Nolan was rightly dismissed in accordance with his contract terms after overseeing a period of dysfunction and was not entitled to fair procedures. Currently, Prof Nolan is set to become the chief executive-designate of Research Ireland, following a proposed amalgamation of the SFI and the Irish Research Council