Three students have launched High proceedings aimed at overturning their expulsions from Dundalk Institute of Technology.

The actions have been brought by Margaret Eyong Taku, Wendy Briggs, and Christina Igweze who were all made the subject of internal disciplinary proceedings arising out of several related alleged incidents that occurred on the college’s campus involving the three on January 30th-31th last.

Among the allegations are that the three were involved in an aggressive physical altercation with each other.

The three students were initially suspended from their courses as the college deemed the allegations amounted to a “serious offence” under its own disciplinary procedures and regulations, and code of conduct.

The allegations, of disorderly behaviour, the physical abuse of another person and being involved in an aggressive physical altercation with another person, were considered by a disciplinary committee of the college.

In February that committee recommended that all three be expelled from the college and banned from its campus and grounds.

The three, who claim that they had never been involved in disciplinary proceedings beforehand, appealed that decision.

In April an Appeals Committee of the college considered and rejected all three of their appeals.

In separate but similar High Court actions all three students claim the decision arrived by the college is flawed and should be set aside.

They claim that the findings made by the college were made outside of its powers of and in excess of its jurisdiction.

It is also alleged that the findings were disproportionate, and that the college failed to have regard to relevant considerations.

It is further claimed that the college failed to provide adequate reasons for its decision.

Prior to their expulsion Ms Taku, from Tinnamona Callan, Co Killenny and Ms Christina Igweze of Knightsgate Avenue, Rush Co Dublin were undergraduate students in the college’s Bachelor of Science in Mental Health Nursing.

Ms Briggs from North Road Drogheda Co Louth was an undergraduate student in the colleges Bachelor of Science in Bioscience.

In their actions against the college the three students, represented by Mark William Murphy Bl instructed by solicitor Conor MacGuill, each seeks orders quashing the colleges decision to expel them, that they be re-admitted back to their respective programmes, and damages from the respondent.

They also seek various declarations from the court including one that the college acted outside of its powers and in excess of its jurisdiction in its conclusions that the applicants constituted a major offence and referring it to the colleges discipline committee.

They seek declarations that the college also acted in excess of its jurisdiction when its appeals committee arrived at decisions that were irrational , unreasonable, disproportionate, and were contrary to the interests of justice.

They further seek declarations that the college serred in law because its appeals committee failed to take relevant considerations into account, took irrelevant considerations into account when it arrived at its decision to expel the three applicants.

The cases came before Ms Justice Niamh Hyland on Monday, who in each case granted the applicants permission to bring their challenges.

Permission was granted on an ex-parte basis.

The cases will return before the courts in October, when the new legal term commences.