Updated: 3.55pm
The High Court has released teacher Enoch Burke from Mountjoy Prison.
Mr Justice Mark Sanfey ordered the teacher's release, where he has been incarcerated since September over his refusal to stay away from Wilson's Hospital School in Co Westmeath.
The judge said that following a review of the situation, and the fact State examinations are now completed and the school is on holidays, he was directing the teacher's release.
The court did not require Mr Burke to purge his contempt and agree to comply with the terms of an order made against him last year, the judge said.
In that decision, Mr Justice Alexander Owens granted Wilson's Hospital School a permanent injunction restraining Mr Burke from attending the school's grounds.
Mr Burke was jailed for contempt, for a second time, in September due to his refusal to comply with that order.
Overall, the teacher has spent over 400 days in prison.
Reflection
Mr Justice Sanfey expressed his hope that the teacher would use the time to reflect on the situation and warned the teacher that the injunction remains in place.
If there was any further breach of the order, the judge said he would have no hesitation in entertaining a fresh application by the school to have Mr Burke committed back to prison.
After the court made its order, Mr Burke left the Four Courts with members of his family.
Mr Burke had appeared before the High Court on Friday as part of his bid to set aside what he claims is the "gravely flawed" and "unconstitutional" order made by Mr Justice Owens, which was underpinning his incarceration.
The judge heard submissions from both the teacher and the school over whether the court has the jurisdiction to entertain an application by the teacher to have the judgement by Mr Justice Owens aside.
Mr Burke has denies that he is in contempt of court, and says he has wrongfully been imprisoned because of his objections to "Transgenderism" following a direction by the school to call a then student by a different pronoun.
Jurisdiction
Earlier, in his submissions to the court, Mr Burke argued that the High Court does have the jurisdiction to consider his application to set aside Mr Justice Owen's injunction.
Mr Burke argued that in his judgement Mr Justice Owens completely disregarded the teacher's constitutional rights of freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion when he refused to comply with the school's direction to call a then student by a different name and use the pronoun "they".
This resulted in the proceedings against him, which Mr Burke said had resulted in him losing two years of his life.
Having to call somebody "they", the teacher said, has no basis in Irish law.
Nowhere could it be found in Mr Justice Owens' judgement that Mr Burke's constitutional rights had been taken into consideration, which they ought to have been, the teacher added.
This was a serious matter, Mr Burke said, who accepted that he did not appeal Mr Justice Owen's decision to the Court of Appeal.
In reply, Alex White SC, for the school, said Mr Burke's application amounted to a "gross abuse of the court," was "unsustainable", and is "bound to fail".
As a general rule, judges cannot set aside orders made by judges of the same divisions of the courts.
What the teacher was trying to do in this application, counsel added, was to appeal a decision Mr Burke does not like "by the back door".
Mr Burke had not raised any exception point which would allow the court to set aside the decision, counsel said, adding that Mr Burke had the option to, but had declined to appeal Mr Justice Owen's decision.
Counsel also said the school also "fully rejects" Mr Burke's claims that his constitutional rights were breached.
Counsel said when Mr Justice Owens was hearing the school's case against Mr Burke, the teacher had raised issues about his constitutional rights.
Counsel also argued that the school, its teachers, and students also have constitutional rights, and the school was entitled to have some finality brought to the proceedings.
Following the conclusion of submissions, Mr Justice Sanfey reserved his decision and said he hoped to give his decision on this preliminary issue in the coming weeks.
