TEACHER ENOCH BURKE is to remain behind bars after a judge refused to grant him an order that would end his ongoing suspension from work.

His employer’s decision to suspend him on full pay underpins other High Court orders preventing from attending or teaching at Wilson’s Hospital School in Co Westmeath and one keeping him in Mountjoy Prison arising out of his refusal to comply with the injunction.

Burke, who objects to addressing a student with the pronoun “they”, was committed to prison last week until he agrees to obey the order not to attend at or attempt to teach any classes at the school.

At the High Court today, Justice Eileen Roberts refused to grant Burke an order contained in a counterclaim challenging his suspension.

Before a packed Court 1 in the Four Courts, the judge said she was refusing the order, which was opposed by the school’s, on grounds including that Burke had not at this stage made out a strong case that would be likely to succeed at the full hearing of the action and that the balance of justice favoured the dismissal of his application.

Many of the issues raised by Burke are issues that have to be determined at the full hearing of the dispute and not at this stage of the proceedings, the judge added.

The court also said that under the terms of a Department of Education circular concerning disciplinary action against teachers, the school’s board of management was entitled to place him on paid leave pending the outcome of the disciplinary process.

Following the court’s decision, Burke was invited by the judge, who accepted that Burke holds genuine religious views, to consider purging his contempt.

Burke, who criticised other judges for their decisions to take away his liberty and described himself as a law-abiding citizen whose first loyalty is to god, repeated his intention not to comply with the order against him.

Justice Roberts informed Burke that he can secure his release by purging his contempt at any time.

The History and German teacher was suspended on full pay late last August pending an investigation into alleged misconduct, which he denies.

Arising out of his refusal to stay away from the campus the school’s board of management obtained a High Court injunction against him.

His refusal to comply with that order resulted in his incarceration at Mountjoy prison for contempt of court.

Burke claims that his opposition to a direction by his employer to address a student at the school by the pronoun ‘they’ and by a different name is contrary to his Christian beliefs.

He says that the suspension is unlawful, unfair and unreasonable and in breach of his constitutional rights to religion, freedom of expression and conscience.

During today’s sitting of the court the school opposed his application to lift the school’s decision to put him on paid administrative leave.

Rosemary Mallon Bl for the school argued that what Burke was effectively trying to do was get the High Court to overturn another order of the High Court, which he is not entitled to do.

Mallon also repeated her arguments to the court that the case before the judge was not about the teacher’s opposition to people being transgender but was about his refusal to obey an order of the court.

Burke rejects that argument.

Earlier this week, Burke launched his own proceedings against the school where he seeks various orders and declarations including a declaration that the disciplinary process against him is unlawful and a breach of his constitutional rights, including his rights to freedom of expression, conscience, and religion.

He also seeks various orders preventing the school from continuing both his paid administrative leave, and the disciplinary process against him.

He further seeks an order preventing the school from dismissing him from his position.

That application was adjourned after the school gave undertaking not to go ahead with a planned disciplinary meeting due for today.

The school also agreed that no disciplinary meeting will take place unless Burke is given three-day advance notice.

The only issue left arising out of that application was the question of whether the court should grant Burke an injunction in relation to his ongoing suspension.