An old boy asked the Supreme Court to grant an injunction against a decision by St Joseph’s College Hunters Hill to kick out his son because of more than $14,500 in unpaid fees, arguing it was against ‘‘all the Catholic Church’s teachings and beliefs’’.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The father took the private school to court after headmaster Ross Tarlinton said his 13-year-old son could not return to year 7 in term two this year and would have to enrol in another school.
His father had failed to pay the term one fees of $10,897 despite being given several extensions, and three cheques totalling $4553.50 for uniforms, textbooks and the college registration fee had bounced.
In an urgent hearing on April 28, on the eve of the start of term two, the father told Justice Patricia Bergin the college was bound by contract to accept his son as a student in term two.
‘‘I believe in the Marist system, I believe that no kid, upon having a contract saying you can come to the school for the next six years, I don’t believe in kicking a kid out,’’ said the father, who represented himself.
The father claimed he could afford the school fees but he was embroiled in legal disputes in a number of courts and was expecting at least $15,000 to be paid to him once the cases were resolved.
‘‘He loves the place, everybody loves him,’’ he said.
In an interview in January, the father admitted his financial difficulties to the school and was told not to worry as he could pay by weekly $600 instalments or monthly $2500 instalments.
In court, he argued this amounted to a binding contract, which justified him in not paying his son’s school fees.
The father also asked the court to restrain the college from notifying the Department of Education that no arrangements had been made for his son to attend school elsewhere.
Justice Bergin refused to grant the injunctions and rejected an application for an order to allow the son to attend a football camp that day.
‘‘The distress [the father] feels at the termination of his son’s enrolment is palpable,’’ she said.
‘‘However, whilst [the son] is enrolled some other young person is not able to be enrolled.’’
Last month, Justice Richard White confirmed the decision and ordered the family to pay the school’s legal costs. ‘‘The simple fact is that [the father] and his wife have not paid the fees,’’ he said.
Justice White said he had been told the son was being home schooled.
