AN Asian boy whose home came under racist attack does not have to leave a Belfast grammar school, a High Court judge has ruled.
Mr Justice Colton identified procedural unfairness in an 'Exceptional Circumstances Body' (ECB) decision requiring a place to be found for the 12-year-old.
But he rejected the school's arguments that continuing his education there would be harmful to his well-being and welfare.
The judge held it would not be in the boy's best interests to direct he must leave a network of friends after settling in for two months.
"Any decision by this court to require him to be moved from School X where he professes to be happy is bound to be very distressing for him," he said.
Anonymity orders imposed in the case prevent any of the parties being identified.
The boy, whose family have been granted political asylum in the UK, failed to gain the required score when he sat the AQE transfer test last year.
However, he was given a place based on circumstances linked to suspected hate crime against his family after they arrived in Northern Ireland.
Their home was attacked, a car was burnt and a threatening racist letter left at the door of the property.
The boy, referred to only as AA, developed psychological symptoms. He was in constant fear and could not be left alone, the court heard.
His parents applied to the ECB in a bid to to get him into the grammar school, citing the psychiatric trauma.
The board considered the case twice over the summer and issued the direction both times that he should be admitted to the school.
It concluded that it was essential for him to retain a close network of close friends also being educated there.
The school consented to him entering first year in August "under protest" and without prejudice to its legal challenge to the ECB.
Counsel for the school argued that it was not in AA's best interests to remain there due to his low academic performance.
Concerns were raised about the child's own welfare if he continues to fall behind classmates.
The school's lawyers also argued that it knew nothing about the first ECB hearing in July and the principal was wrongly "kept in the dark" about any network of friends during the second tribunal in August.
Mr Justice Colton backed submissions that there had been a procedural unfairness in the ECB decision making process.
But he resisted the school's submissions that the decision should be quashed or reconsidered by a different ECB panel.
The judge pointed to a statement from AA indicating he was enjoying his education with a network of friends.
The boy said: "I would feel angry and sad if I had to leave the school now."
He also set out concerns at moving to another school where he wouldn't know anyone.
"They wouldn't know my story. I think it would make it more difficult for me to deal with my problems," he added.
