Lecturer settles defamation action against National College of Ireland

A lecturer who claimed he was defamed in a letter sent by his college authorities to around 100 students has settled his High Court action, writes Ann O'Loughlin. .

Keith Maycock, a computer science lecturer, sued the National College of Ireland (NCI), IFSC, Dublin.

He claimed the February 2015 letter which stated a course module he had designed was inappropriate was defamatory because if effectively meant he could not do his job.

The NCI denied his claims and said the letter was written in good faith.

The settlement came midway through cross-examination of a witness for Mr Maycock on the third day of the action before a judge and jury.

Following talks after lunchtime, John O'Donnell SC For Mr Maycock, told Mr Justice Bernard Barton he was happy to say the time given for talks had been put to very good use and the case had been resolved. The terms were confidential save for an order in terms of costs.

Mr Justice Barton discharged the jury and excused them from jury duty for five years.

Just before the settlement talks, Brian Gillespie, a lecturer in a number of colleges who worked for the NCI between 2011 and 2015, told the court he had marked a paper, at Mr Maycock's request, in the run-up to what the court heard became the "grade inflation controversy" in 2013.

This controversy, Mr Maycock said, led to him being sidelined by the college management which culminated in the allegedly defamatory letter 14 months later.

Mr Maycock had concerns in 2013 that some eight dissertations in a Masters programme had achieved very high marks which were not deserved. The college decided to impose a 10% across the board cut to all the papers which Mr Maycock saw as grade inflation.

Mr Gillespie told the court when he marked the paper given to him by Mr Maycock, he graded it as 26%, "a clear fail". He learned later it had been graded by the actual examiner at 73%, a first class honours.

Under cross-examination by Shane English BL, for the NCI, Mr Gillespie said he did not know this was an industry-based dissertation as distinct from a research-based paper. The industry-based paper usually meant it was subject to non-disclosure.

Mr Gillespie said he could not recall any detailed discussion with Mr Maycock about the paper he was being asked to grade but it was not necessary to know the background when one is asked to do what is known as a "third reading" of a paper. He agreed it was unusual for someone outside a course to be asked to do so.

Earlier, another NCI lecturer, told the court he saw Mr Maycock as "very brave" and "standing up for his academic beliefs".

Johnathan Lambert, NCI mathematics support and development officer, who is also a SIPTU representative in the college, said Mr Maycock is held in very high regard by colleagues and students.

He believed in high standards and quality and was highly motivated, Mr Lambert told John O'Donnell SC for Mr Maycock.

While he worked very well in the collaborative college environment, his relationship with management had however become toxic, he said.

As a result however of standing up for his beliefs, things had become very hard for him, Mr Lambert said.