Cyprus’ Administrative Court of Appeal has upheld the termination of a primary school teacher’s probationary appointment following six unsatisfactory evaluations, two extensions of her probationary period and a support programme aimed at improving her performance.
The court ruled that the Educational Service Commission (ESC) had acted lawfully based on the evaluations and evidence available to it. It also ordered the teacher to pay €3,000 in legal costs to the Republic of Cyprus.
Six negative evaluations and two extensions
The teacher was appointed to a permanent primary education position on a probationary basis on 1 September 2016.
During her initial two-year probationary period, all four six-month evaluations, covering September 2016 to August 2018, were rated unsatisfactory by the responsible inspectors.
On 3 October 2018, the ESC extended her probation until 28 February 2019 due to concerns over her professional performance.
A fifth negative evaluation followed, prompting a second extension until 31 August 2019.
However, her final evaluation was also deemed unsatisfactory by two primary education inspectors, leading the Department of Primary Education to recommend the immediate termination of her appointment.
The teacher appeared before the ESC with her lawyer on 26 September 2019 to present her case.
The following day, the Commission decided to terminate her probationary appointment, effective 30 September 2019.
Teacher challenges dismissal in court
The teacher challenged the decision before the Administrative Court, which dismissed her application on 30 June 2022.
She subsequently appealed, presenting six grounds for overturning the original judgment.
Among other arguments, she claimed that her right to be heard had been violated before the negative evaluations were prepared.
She also argued that the authorities had failed to investigate her case adequately and that the support programme provided did not meet legal requirements.
The Administrative Court of Appeal examined the requirement for teachers to be given an opportunity to respond before adverse performance reports are issued.
Referring to a May 2025 Supreme Constitutional Court ruling, it noted that Article 36(4) of the Public Educational Service Law requires teachers to be given the opportunity to be heard and submit representations before an adverse service report is prepared.
Court finds teacher had opportunities to respond
In this case, however, the Appeals Court found that there had been continuous communication between the teacher and the responsible inspectors.
The inspectors had repeatedly informed her of weaknesses in her teaching performance, while support programmes were developed with the involvement of inspectors, school authorities and the teacher herself.
In a letter dated 23 March 2018, she was informed that she would participate in a support programme designed to address the shortcomings identified in previous evaluations.
Responding on 30 April 2018, she expressed her willingness to cooperate and make every possible effort to improve her teaching performance.
The court concluded that the teacher had been aware of the concerns, had received guidance and had opportunities to express her views.
Furthermore, when the ESC considered terminating her appointment, she was formally notified and allowed to submit both oral and written representations.
Appeals Court upholds dismissal
The court rejected the remaining grounds of appeal, finding that the Ministry had provided the support programme required by law.
It also found no evidence of abuse of power, inadequate investigation, factual error or insufficient justification.
The judgment emphasised that assessing teachers’ professional competence is primarily the responsibility of the educational authorities, provided they act within their legal powers.
According to ESC records, despite the educational and pedagogical guidance provided throughout the initial probationary period and its two extensions, the teacher demonstrated “minimal to no improvement”.
The Administrative Court of Appeal ultimately dismissed all six grounds of appeal, upheld the original judgment and awarded €3,000 in legal costs to the Republic of Cyprus.
Source: Panayiota Charalambous- Philelenews
