Adolescence
is a time for asserting independence and for testing boundaries. In a High
Court challenge to rules governing hair length at St John’s College, Hastings, Justice
Collins said the law requires school rules be clear and certain, be applied
reasonably and if breached the penalty must match the offending.
St John’s College was
told its suspension of sixteen year old student Lucan Battison for refusing to
cut his hair shorter was unlawful because the School’s rules on hair were uncertain
and the manner of his suspension was unreasonable.
The court was told
Lucan has naturally curly hair. School
rules require hair to be off the collar and out of eyes. Twice in March 2014, teachers demanded Lucan
cut his hair shorter, against his wishes.
This issue became more contentious several months later, two weeks after
the appointment of Mr Paul Melloy as the School’s new principal. Evidence was given that Lucan’s hair had been
much the same length for all the time he had been at the School.
Lucan was suspended by
the headmaster for refusing to shorten his hair. This suspension was confirmed by the School
Board’s disciplinary committee.
Justice Collins said
the Education Act allows schools to suspend students if the student’s gross misconduct or continual disobedience is
a harmful or dangerous example to other students. A decision to suspend must be based on
reasonable grounds. This creates a high
threshold for suspension, he said.
There was no evidence
that Lucan’s hair length amounted to a harmful or dangerous example to other
students. The mere fact that a teacher
demanded he cut his hair was not grounds alone for suspension. The Board’s disciplinary committee did not
comply with the Education Act, Justice Collins ruled. It did not exercise independent judgment as
to whether Lucan’s offer to wear his hair in a bun constituted compliance with
the School’s hair rule. The disciplinary
committee simply endorsed the headmaster’s decision to suspend. There was evidence that other schools in the
Hawkes Bay region allowed pupils of both gender to wear their hair long,
provided it was in a ponytail.
In any event, the
punishment must fit the crime. There
must be a correlation between the offending and the punishment. The degree of Lucan’s continued disobedience
was not great enough to warrant suspension, Justice Collins said.
In conclusion, Justice
Collins said St John’s hair rule was invalid on the grounds of
uncertainty. He contrasted the general
wording in the School’s hair rule with the carefully prescribed rules governing
dress standards and wearing of the School uniform. All students and parents knew in advance of
the School’s uniform requirements. The
hair rule was capable of different interpretations by students, parents, teachers,
the principal and the Board.
Battison
v. Melloy – High Court (27.06.14)
14.027