Enoch Burke’s legal battles reached a new level on March 18, 2025, when the High Court appointed a receiver to collect nearly €80,000 in unpaid fines owed due to his persistent disregard of court orders. Burke, a former teacher at Wilson's Hospital School in Co. Westmeath, faced fines stemming from his refusal to comply with a directive prohibiting him from attending the school. This order was put in place following a series of incidents related to his refusal to address a transitioning student with the appropriate pronouns.
The High Court's latest ruling freezes Burke’s bank account, granting him until March 25 to argue against the garnishment of his funds. Until now, despite his legal troubles, he has continued to receive his full salary of approximately €48,000 from the Department of Education while contesting his dismissal.
Judge David Nolan imposed a conditional order that allows for the garnishment of Burke’s salary, illustrating the court’s attempt to recover the fines resulting from his contemptuous actions. During the latest court session, Judge Nolan highlighted the ongoing refusal to abide by previous court orders, noting, “It is clear to me that the plaintiff [Mr. Burke] has no intention of abiding by the court orders.” Burke has reportedly not taught at the school since September 2022.
Burke’s plight stems from his staunch Christian beliefs, which he argues are in conflict with the court’s directives. He has insisted that the requirement to use specific pronouns violates his constitutional right to express his religious beliefs. His battles have garnered significant public attention, as he maintains that he is being persecuted for standing up for what he believes.
As tensions mounted in the courtroom, Judge Nolan echoed Burke’s perceived attitude toward the legal system: “He seems to regard himself as a martyr… that is simply not the case. All the court is trying to ensure is that he, along with all the other citizens of the State, abide by the rule of law.” This framing of Burke’s actions emphasizes a broader discussion of religious freedom versus compliance with judicial mandates.
The functionality of the High Court’s rulings has raised questions regarding the practicality of enforcing compliance among defendants like Burke. Brian Kennedy, a barrister representing the Attorney General, argued that the court has the authority to impose these garnishments since Burke is receiving money from the State: “There was no evidence the order would be futile or mean hardship to Enoch Burke.”
As part of the ongoing legal proceedings, Burke has faced additional scrutiny for turning up at the school despite being expressly banned from doing so. His continued presence at the institution resulted in Judge Nolan increasing his daily fines from €700 to €1,400 in March 2025 due to the severity of his contempt. This increase reflects the court’s frustration with Burke’s noncompliance, underscoring the fine’s escalating nature.
Notably, Burke’s family has been involved in the legal proceedings, with relatives appearing in court to support him. However, disruptions from family members have sometimes hindered proceedings, as seen during the recent court session when Burke's brother, Isaac, attempted to interject. Judge Nolan warned that continued interruptions would result in contempt charges—a sentiment he reiterated when speaking about the need for decorum in the courtroom.
With the court scheduled to reconvene on March 25, 2025, Burke will have the opportunity to contest the latest garnishment order. Until then, his financial and legal futures remain uncertain. Observers and commentators continue to watch closely, considering the implications not only for Burke but for the broader landscape of religious expression within educational institutions in Ireland.
Ultimately, Enoch Burke’s case represents a compelling intersection of law, religious freedoms, and individual rights. As the situation unfolds, there remain significant questions about the limits of personal beliefs in the face of judicial requirements, and how far one can go in standing up against what they believe to be persecution without facing the decided consequences of the law.
