Court refuses to significantly extend injunction stopping Philip Nolan’s dismissal from SFI

He said the board was entitled to dismiss the director general “for no reason at all” in accordance with the terms of his contract, but the reasons for its decision are “no doubt connected” to disruption following the making of claims against Prof. Nolan by five senior staff members last December.

Prof. Nolan may be able to show at a full trial of the case that this was, in substance, dismissal for misconduct, the judge said. However, on the current evidence he has not established that he has a “strong case likely to succeed” that the SFI board’s decision was based on its conclusion that he was guilty of misconduct and this was the basis for dismissal.

The judge said he has not met the necessary threshold for granting mandatory orders presenting his dismissal. The case will be listed before him on July 4.

Previous hearing

Three weeks ago, Mr Justice Mulcahy granted Prof Nolan orders halting his dismissal for one day, after which SFI told the court it agreed, without prejudice, to an extension of these until the judge rules on this application for “interlocutory” orders, which would have lasted until the case is resolved.

The former member of the covid-19 National Public Health Emergency Team (Nphet) first turned to the High Court days after receiving a letter from the SFI board purporting to terminate his contract, with three months’ salary paid in lieu of working out the notice period.

The letter noted two reports into claims made against him by five senior staff made no findings of bullying or corporate governance breaches against him.

However, the board believed there was a “threat of the most serious kind” to the foundation’s performance of its statutory duties and a “breakdown” in relations between Prof. Nolan and the executive committee.

The court has heard that, while a barrister’s investigation into the claims against Prof Nolan made no findings against him, it concluded that he engaged in inappropriate behaviour that could ground allegations of gross misconduct. Prof Nolan emphatically rejects the investigation’s conclusion.

Prof Nolan’s lawyers argue there was “no conceivable justification” for his dismissal. The allegations made against him “without foundation” last December were part of an “orchestrated” bid to frustrate reform of the foundation, he claims.

‘Dire’ situation

SFI, represented by Mark Connaughton SC and Shelley Horan BL, instructed by McCann Fitzgerald solicitors, contends Prof. Nolan was let go pursuant to the terms of his contract, which it says permits a “no fault” termination.

The SFI board’s chair, Professor James Peter Clinch, said the organisation was not functioning normally and was in a “dire” situation under Prof. Nolan’s leadership due to a breakdown of trust.

He said the director general “struggled with his emotions when challenged or when he did not get his way”. He rejected as a “conspiracy” theory the claim there was an “orchestrated” bid to exit Prof Nolan from SFI and he emphasised the professionalism and expertise of the board.

In an affidavit, Prof Nolan said he can continue to perform his role to the benefit of SFI and a planned organisation that will emerge from the amalgamation of SFI and the Irish Research Council. He has been appointed CEO-designate of the merged body, Research Ireland.