Anita Groener Vs. the Minister for Education and the City of Dublin

SUMMARY OF THE CASE STUDY

The case study is presenting a lawsuit of Anita Groener, who is suing Minister for Education (hereinafter referred as �the Minister’) and the City of Dublin - Vocational Educational Committee (hereinafter referred as �the Education Committee’). The charge was based on the free movement of workers, more specific, knowledge of an official language of the host country. Mrs. Groener was a Netherlands’ national, who wanted to work as a full-time art teacher.

The origin of the dispute was the Minister’s refusal to appoint Mrs. Groener to a permanent full-time post as an art teacher employed by the Education Committee after she had failed a test, intended to asses her knowledge of the Irish language. Minister’s approval is required concerning the numbers, qualifications, remuneration and appointment of all employees of each vocational education committee. The competent committee may not appoint a person to a permanent full-time post in certain areas of teaching unless that person holds a certificate of proficiency in the Irish language (Ceard-Teastas Gaeilge) or has an equivalent qualification recognized by the minister. In that case, foreign teachers have to know the Irish language or else they can not teach in Ireland. Appointees who do not hold that certificate may be required to a special examination – an oral test.

In year 1982, Mrs. Groener was engaged on a temporary basis as a part-time art teacher in the College of Marketing and Design in Dublin. This College is under the authority of the Education Committee. Two years later she applied for a permanent full-time lecturer in art. She did not have the Ceard-Teastas Gaeilge and she asked for an exemption, but the request was refused. The reason for that was that there were other fully qualified candidates for the post and the Minister appointed that she had to pass the examination first. Mrs. Groener took a four-week beginners’ course and she did not pass the examination. Then she instituted proceedings for judicial review against the Minister and the Education Committee before the High Court, Dublin.

The documents before Court contain that the teaching of art, like that of most other subjects taught in public vocational education schools, is conducted essentially or indeed exclusively in the English language. It follows that the knowledge of the Irish Language is not required for the performance of the duties which teaching of the kind at issue specifically entails. The national court has to decide whether the linguistic requirement in question is justified �by reason of the nature of the post to be filled’. The Irish Constitution says: 1) The Irish language as the national language is the first official language, 2) The English language is recognized as a second official language, 3) Provision may be made by law for the exclusive use of either of the said languages for any one or more official purposes, either throughout the State or in any part thereof.

Irish is not spoken by the whole Irish population. The Irish government designed this policy to maintain and to promote their identity and culture. Teachers have an essential role to play, through teaching and by their participation in the daily life of the school and the privileged relationship which they have with their pupils. In those circumstances it is reasonable to require them to have some knowledge of the first national language. Community law requires that power to grant an exemption is exercised by the Minister in a non-discriminatory manner. The principle of non-discrimination implies that the nationals of other Member States should have an opportunity to retake the oral examination, if they have failed it, when they apply for a post of assistant lecturer or lecturer again.

The Court was in favour of Ireland and Mrs. Anita Groener would have to obey their rules in order to work there as an art teacher.

PERSONAL OPINION OF THE CASE

I do not agree with the result of the lawsuit regarding the court’s decision. I believe that this is not the case of direct discrimination because the law says that Irish is the first official language and this requirement is applied in a proportionate and non-discriminatory manner, even though it could be a case of indirect discrimination, because Mrs. Groener would not teach art in Irish language but in English.

Direct discrimination is pretty straightforward in most cases. It happens when you are dealt with unfairly on the basis of one of the grounds (compared with someone who does not