Click the case name for better results:

Richardson v Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council Special Educational Needs Tribunal; White v London Borough of Ealing Special Needs Tribunal and Hereford and Worcester County Court v Karen Lane: CA 12 Feb 1998

The need to specify the special educational needs for a child did not necessarily mean that any particular school must be nominated, nor even that the need must be met through a school. Whilst the definition of ‘special educational provision’ in section 312(4) of the 1996 Act is wide enough to include naming a particular … Continue reading Richardson v Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council Special Educational Needs Tribunal; White v London Borough of Ealing Special Needs Tribunal and Hereford and Worcester County Court v Karen Lane: CA 12 Feb 1998

Robert Duhaney White v London Borough of Ealing and Special Educational Needs Tribunal: Admn 8 Jul 1997

Gilliatt The court heard three separate appeals from decisions of SENTs where parents wished their autistic children to attend the Boston Higashi School, USA which involved a residential placement. Fees to attend this establishment exceeded andpound;50,000 a year. The court held that there was no duty on the LEA or the SENT under the Education … Continue reading Robert Duhaney White v London Borough of Ealing and Special Educational Needs Tribunal: Admn 8 Jul 1997

M, Regina (on the Application of) v Sutton London Borough Council: CA 21 Nov 2007

The local authority had in the statement of special educational needs specified a school in accordance with the parent’s choice, but on condition that the parents were to be responsible for the cost of transport to and from school. Held: The authority’s appeal against an order that it should pay for the transport succeeded. The … Continue reading M, Regina (on the Application of) v Sutton London Borough Council: CA 21 Nov 2007

Oxfordshire County Council v GB and Others: CA 22 Aug 2001

When an appeal was lodged against the decision of the Special Educational Needs Tribunal, it was wrong for that Tribunal later to expand on its reasons, save in exceptional circumstances. Parental preference was not an overriding consideration, given the possible substantial costs of providing education in a special school. The tribunal must strike a balance, … Continue reading Oxfordshire County Council v GB and Others: CA 22 Aug 2001

Regina v Islington London Borough Council, ex parte G A (a Child): Admn 20 Oct 2000

The child was severely disabled and was to be schooled as a weekday boarder 75 miles from home. He sought assistance with the travelling expenses when his condition worsened and the arrangements became more burdensome. Held: It was not open to a local authority to refuse to contribute to a child’s travelling expenses to a … Continue reading Regina v Islington London Borough Council, ex parte G A (a Child): Admn 20 Oct 2000

W v Gloucestershire County Council and Another: QBD 19 Jul 2001

The father had applied for an assessment of his son’s special educational needs. He was found to be in need of support, but the authority named a school other than the one the father nominated. He appealed, claiming that the authority had failed to allow for circumstances outside those which immediately gave rise to the … Continue reading W v Gloucestershire County Council and Another: QBD 19 Jul 2001

Regina (M) v East Sussex County Council: QBD 28 Apr 2009

The child had a statement of special educational needs, but after moving to a secondary school, complained that the statement had not been updated. Held: The statement should have been updated to name and specify the type of school he should attend. Timothy Brennan, QC J Times 12-May-2009, [2009] EWHC 1651 (Admin) Bailii Education (Special … Continue reading Regina (M) v East Sussex County Council: QBD 28 Apr 2009

H v East Sussex County Council and Others: CA 31 Mar 2009

The claimant had a statement of special educational needs, which she sought to have altered to specify a different school. She appealed from a refusal to amend the statement, saying that the Tribunal had not given sufficient weight to educational experts without stating why. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The court contrasted the approaches taken … Continue reading H v East Sussex County Council and Others: CA 31 Mar 2009

Regina v Bartle and Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte; Regina v Evans and Similar (No 3): HL 24 Mar 1999

An application to extradite a former head of state for an offence which was not at the time an offence under English law would fail, but could proceed in respect of allegations of acts after that time. No immunity was intended for heads of state. International law prohibiting torture has the character of jus cogens … Continue reading Regina v Bartle and Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte; Regina v Evans and Similar (No 3): HL 24 Mar 1999