Decision Reserved On Teacher’s Claim (Press, 15 December 1988)

On 15 December 1988, the High Court in Wellington reserved its decision on a damages claim made by David Balfour, a teacher who alleged that a note on his file falsely branded him as a "long-practising and blatant homosexual." Balfour is seeking $200,000 in damages from the Education Department, claiming that the note, which he discovered using the Official Information Act, harmed his career and led to his rejection from a 1980 training course for teaching handicapped children. Balfour contends that the allegations about his sexuality are untrue and assert that they negatively impacted his chances for professional advancement. During the hearing, Mr Justice Greig considered submissions from Balfour's lawyer, Mike Camp, and the department's representative, Ken Stone. Stone disputed Balfour’s claims, arguing that his absence from State secondary school teaching for three years prior to his application, along with his clerical job at an oil company, significantly diminished his prospects for acceptance into the competitive training course, where only 20 out of 66 applicants were chosen, most of whom had relevant positions in special education. Stone emphasized that the derogatory note written by Kenneth Woodward, a district senior inspector, which mentioned Balfour’s supposed homosexuality, was never communicated to the selection panel and remained solely in Balfour's personal records, thus claiming it could not have impacted his application. He contended that Balfour’s professional status was unaffected since the note did not reach those who made the hiring decisions. In response, Camp argued that the Education Department should have adhered to specific procedures to formally address any claims of immorality regarding Balfour instead of employing the informal and covert method used by Woodward. He stated that the department failed to present evidence supporting the allegation that Balfour was indeed a homosexual or that the note had valid grounds. Camp highlighted a prior incident in 1976 when Balfour was banned from a school in Hawke’s Bay, calling it incomprehensible given the public facts surrounding it. He noted significant gaps in the case, including the absence of testimonies from Woodward or other relevant inspectors. Balfour, who had worked for the Social Welfare Department in 1981, faced a four-year ban from secondary schools in Hawke’s Bay due to these allegations, which greatly hindered his career opportunities. Camp described the situation as an instance of reprehensible smear tactics, given the involvement of authoritative figures. He argued that Balfour's exclusion from the handicapped children training course was just one of many continuing misfortunes resulting from the unjust note and asserted that Balfour would have had a fair chance at the course had it not been for the negatively skewed reference. The case ultimately puts a spotlight on the serious implications of prejudice and discrimination within professional environments concerning personal lives, particularly in the education sector, and raises questions about due process and the responsibilities of employers.

The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact

The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand