Judges:
Ginns J
Citations:
[2006] EWHC 1105 (Admin)
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Education
Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.242199
Ginns J
[2006] EWHC 1105 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.242199
Silner J
[2003] EWHC 3045 (Admin)
Disability Discrimination Act 1995
England and Wales
Cited – K v The School and the Special Needs and Disability Tribunal CA 6-Mar-2007
The child was subject to the school eventually declined to clean and change him. The mother claimed that the school was discriminating.
Held: The mother had understated the frequency of the bowel accidents. The school was not properly equipped . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.188744
Special educational needs
[2012] UKUT 214 (AAC)
England and Wales
Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.466727
Failure to diagnose dyslexia.
May LJ, Longmore LJ, Smith LJ
[2007] EWCA Civ 246
England and Wales
Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.250452
A nine year old pupil was injured by a fellow pupil whirling an anorak around his head. The accident occurred when they were on their way from the school buildings to the school gates at the end of school day. There was no member of staff on duty to supervise the passage of pupils on their way home. The claim against the school succeeded before the trial judge.
Held: The defendant’s appeal was allowed. A primary school was not negligent in not employing someone to supervise the playground after the close of school hours and until all the children had left. The teachers’ evidence that no playground supervision was provided before school hours at any secondary schools where they had taught was the best evidence of the requirements of reasonableness. Mantell LJ: ‘the very short period in which pupils moved from the exit from the school building to the gate at the other end of the playground is quite different, even allowing for the fact that, as the headmaster accepted and Mr Turton emphasised, departing pupils are likely to be high spirited at that particular moment of the day. Moreover, and to my mind most importantly, there was no evidence that supervision at that juncture, as contrasted with the lunch break, is standard procedure, as it surely would be if it was an equally reasonable requirement. I therefore would also allow the appeal.’
Hirst LJ, Mantell LJ
Times 28-Nov-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 2644, [1998] PIQR P145
England and Wales
Cited – Kearn-Price v Kent County Council CA 30-Oct-2002
The claimant was injured, being hit in the face by a football in a school playground. It was before school started. There had been accidents, and there were rules which had not been enforced. The school appealed a finding of negligence.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.143043
Judicial review proceedings which arise out of the wish of the defendant local education authority to change the system of state education in Northumberland.
Munby J
[2006] EWHC 1081 (Admin), [2006] ELR 397, [2006] BLGR 646, [2006] ACD 87
England and Wales
Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.241778
[2006] EWHC 1468 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.242673
[2002] EWHC 1292 (Admin), [2003] ELR 31
England and Wales
Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.175114
A local education authority may properly take into account the financial resources available to it when setting the norm of standards of service and then apply that norm.
Times 02-Oct-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 2278
England and Wales
Appeal from – Regina v East Sussex County Council ex parte Beth Tandy Admn 23-Apr-1997
. .
Appealed to – Regina v East Sussex County Council ex parte Beth Tandy Admn 23-Apr-1997
. .
Appeal from – Regina v East Sussex County Council Ex Parte Tandy HL 21-May-1998
A Local Authority may not take its own financial constraints into account when assessing what was an appropriate education for a child in special needs case. It was wrong to try to turn a statutory duty into a power or a discretion. Ordinarily cost, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.142675
A Local Education Authority may properly take into account the financial resources available to it when setting norm of standards of service and then apply that norm.
Gazette 10-Sep-1997
England and Wales
Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.86615
[2012] EWHC 2928 (Admin)
Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.465675
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Peter Gibson, Phillips LJJ
[1997] EWCA Civ 1359
England and Wales
Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.141755
Lord Justice Dyson
Lord Justice Wilson
And
Mr Justice Holman
[2007] EWCA Civ 1145
England and Wales
Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.261367
[2002] EWHC 1371 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.175120
The child was subject to the school eventually declined to clean and change him. The mother claimed that the school was discriminating.
Held: The mother had understated the frequency of the bowel accidents. The school was not properly equipped to deal with them. The school head concluded that it could not sustain the placement out of health and safety. K’s helper had already suffered injury lifting K. The school had taken reasonable steps to accommodate K, and had failed. They had satisfied their stautory duty.
Auld LJ, Wall LJ, Hallett LJ
[2007] EWCA Civ 165, Times 11-Apr-2007
Disability Discrimination Act 1995 28A 28B 28C, Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001 11 12 13, Education (SEN) (England) (Consolidation) Regulations 2001
England and Wales
Cited – Bromley London Borough Council v Special Educational Needs Tribunal and Others CA 26-May-1999
The needs of a child, as to educational and non-educational overlapped, and accordingly, it was within the discretion of the Special Needs Tribunal to include among the educational needs of a child others within that overlap. Physiological, . .
Cited – W v Leeds City Council and SENDIST CA 29-Jul-2005
The court recognised a distinction between educational and non-educational provision as it affected a statement of special educational needs. Judge LJ: ‘Consistent with the relevant statutory provision, Part 3 of the Statement must make provision . .
Cited – AB X and Y, Regina (on the Application of) v East Sussex County Council and Another Admn 18-Feb-2003
The physical and psychological integrity which the state may in principle be under an obligation to take positive steps to protect under Article 8 included two particularly important concepts. The first was human dignity, the second was the right of . .
Cited – VK v Norfolk County Council and Another Admn 17-Dec-2004
When recording the facts, a tribunal should be careful not simply to repeat the evidence heard without making clear which evidence had been accepted and which not. . .
Cited – Collins v Royal National Theatre Board Limited CA 17-Feb-2004
Can an employer’s failure to make adjustments to accommodate a disabled employee be unreasonable but justified?
Held: The justification under 5(2)(b) must be something other than the circumstances which are taken into account for the purpose . .
Cited – McAuley Catholic High School v CC, PC and another Admn 11-Dec-2003
. .
Cited – Royal National Theatre Board Ltd v Collins EAT 29-Apr-2003
Appeal against finding of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.249863
Bean J
[2005] EWHC 558 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.224843
Mr Justice Cavanagh
[2020] EWHC 580 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.648876
The applicant’s daughter had been convicted of a petty assault, and she had herself been made subject of a twelve month parenting order. She appealed.
Held: Parenting orders are proper within a democratic society, and do not infringe a parent’s right to respect for family life. Nevertheless, no responsible bench could have made such an order in this case.
Rose LJ, Henriques J
Times 27-Feb-2003, [2003] EWHC 301 (Admin), [2003] 1 FLR 994
European Convention on Human Rights 8
England and Wales
Cited – R, Regina (on the Application of) v Durham Constabulary and Another HL 17-Mar-2005
The appellant, a boy aged 15, had been warned as to admitted indecent assaults on girls. He complained that it had not been explained to him that the result would be that his name would be placed on the sex offenders register. The Chief Constable . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 November 2022; Ref: scu.179785
Local Authority can cease to maintain a statement of special education needs once child gets to 16.
Times 17-Oct-1996
England and Wales
Updated: 01 November 2022; Ref: scu.81718
Special educational needs – Failure to make a statement
Judge Pearl
[2012] UKUT 85 (AAC)
Updated: 01 November 2022; Ref: scu.460242
The re-admission of a violent pupil must allow for effect on victim of re-admission.
Times 15-Aug-1996
England and Wales
Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.86282
Request for judicial review of decision to suspend the claimant from acting as a school governor.
Pelling QC HHJ
[2011] EWHC 3489 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.459747
The claimant had been dismissed for gross misconduct. As a teacher he had drunk alcohol at school, and taken a bottle of wine. His complaint of unfair dismissal had been dismissed, and he appealed that decision, saying the school had departed from proper procedures, that the panels had been chosen in contravention of procedures, and that the allegation was initially of serious misconduct, and only became an allegation of gross misconduct at the hearing. The panel had been chosen by the chairman of governors under procedures designed for urgency, but where in fact time existed to take the decision in accordance with the statutory procedures. The tribunal had erred in law. The tribunal had restricted evidence from witnesses challenging the bias of the head. The appeal succeeded, but in the light of the claimant’s own admissions, the compensatory award will be nil, and the basic award calculated at 50%.
His Honour Judge J Altman
[2001] UKEAT 177 – 00 – 1511, EAT/177/00
Education (School Government) Regulations 1989, Education Act 1996 27, Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1993
England and Wales
Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.204425
[2020] EWCA Civ 226
England and Wales
Updated: 28 October 2022; Ref: scu.648561
[1995] ELR 71, [1994] EWCA Civ 37, [1995] 2 FCR 225, [1995] COD 48
England and Wales
Appeal from – Regina v Secretary of State for Education ex parte S QBD 21-Dec-1993
The Secretary of State is to disclose all advice on appeal against special needs assessment. . .
Cited – Eisai Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and Shire Pharmaceuticals Limited and Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (Interveners) CA 1-May-2008
The applicant pharmaceutical companies challenged the decision of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) to to list certain drugs saying that the procedure adopted was unfair. NICE had revealed that results of calculations it had made . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.267531
The question was whether a school which was not that of parental choice could be regarded as suitable or, to put it the other way round, whether free transport had to be provided where a parent had chosen a school which was not the nearest to the child’s home and that choice had been accepted by the local education authority.
Held: ‘The County Council have two alternative points . . First they say that under s.39(2)(c) it is the arrangements that have to be suitable, not the school nearest home. Presumably they would say, in a case which involved either of the other two choices in that paragraph [i.e. what are now s.444(4)(b)(i) and (ii)] that the transport or the boarding accommodation does not have to be suitable, but only the arrangements. That argument appealed to Rose J in R v East Sussex CC ex p D [1991] 15 March (unreported) and to Jowitt J in the present case, but not to Roch J R v Rochdale Metropolitan BC ex p Schemet [1994] E.L.R. 89. It does not appeal to me. Arrangements for unsuitable transport, or unsuitable boarding accommodation or an unsuitable school nearer home, are in my judgment unsuitable arrangements. I cannot elaborate the point further than that’. Steyn LJ: ‘ . . In my view s.39(2)(c) . . contemplated that a local education authority is entitled to make arrangements for a child registered at one school to become a registered pupil at another suitable school nearer home . . An acceptance of the appellants’ argument would emasculate the local education authority’s power under s.39(2)(c) to nominate an objectively suitable school nearer the child’s home’. Russell LJ: ‘ . . I cannot believe that parliament intended that a parent could always demand free transport irrespective of the distance involved and irrespective of an equally suitable educational establishment nearer to the child’s home’.
Staughton LJ, Steyn LJ and Russell LJ
[1994] ELR 273
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council, ex parte Schemet QBD 1993
The court considered the withdrawal of a policy whereby the local authority paid travelling expenses for the attendance of pupils at denominational schools outside the area.
Held: Relief was granted. The authority should have consulted those . .
Cited – In Re S CA 1995
Parents wanted their children to attend English middle schools in Wales. The Court dealt with the argument that the objective suitability of the nearer school had to be considered by the court on judicial review. Alternatively, it was argued that it . .
Cited – Jones, Regina (on the Application of) v Ceredigion County Council Admn 22-Jun-2004
The parents lawfully chose to send their child to a Welsh language school. The authority refused to provide free transport on the basis that a nearer school was available even though it was not a Welsh language school.
Held: Provided the . .
Cited – Jones, Regina (on the Application of) v Ceredigion County Council Admn 22-Jun-2004
The parents lawfully chose to send their child to a Welsh language school. The authority refused to provide free transport on the basis that a nearer school was available even though it was not a Welsh language school.
Held: Provided the . .
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.199247
The Secretary of State need not disclose his internal advice on an appeal on a special needs assessment. He had not acted unfairly.
Independent 21-Sep-1994, Ind Summary 15-Aug-1994
England and Wales
Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.87709
Secretary of State no duty to disclose advice on special needs award if raises no new point.
Times 20-Jul-1994
England and Wales
Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.87710
Free transport to a school of the parents’ choice is not a Local Authority obligation.
Ind Summary 20-Dec-1993, Times 09-Dec-1993
England and Wales
Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.86642
There was no statutory duty on a school to accept parental preferences on admission.
Ind Summary 06-Dec-1993
England and Wales
Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.86746
An Education Authority may be sued for a negligent failure to assess and provide for a child’s special educational needs.
Independent 04-May-1994, [1998] ELR 1
England and Wales
Cited – David Lannigan v Glasgow City Council OHCS 12-Aug-2004
The pursuer said the teachers employed by the defendant had failed to identify that was dyslexic, leading him to suffer damage. The defenders said the claim was time barred, which the pursuer admitted, but then said that the claim ought to go ahead . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.86563
An offer of a student place was capable of acceptance, but a mandatory injunction was refused. The court gave guidance on how to decide if leave was necessary to make an appeal to the Court of Appeal.
Independent 26-Nov-1993, Times 27-Oct-1993, Ind Summary 29-Nov-1993
Rules of the Supreme Court 59, Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 7(1)
England and Wales
Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.83823
Whether the Claimant was unlawfully refused a student loan.
Nicol J
[2020] EWHC 276 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.648871
There was no need for consultation before a school can be closed as a failing school. Simon Brown LJ emphasised the need to avoid a mechanistic approach to the requirements of consultation.
Simon Brown LJ
Times 15-Dec-1995, [1996] ELR 162
England and Wales
Cited – Eisai Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and Shire Pharmaceuticals Limited and Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (Interveners) CA 1-May-2008
The applicant pharmaceutical companies challenged the decision of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) to to list certain drugs saying that the procedure adopted was unfair. NICE had revealed that results of calculations it had made . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 October 2022; Ref: scu.87703
Jackson J
[2004] EWHC 3014 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 19 October 2022; Ref: scu.226933
The applicant was refused registration as a child minder, on the basis that a person is qualified for registration for childminding if she is ‘suitable to look after children under the age of eight’ and that the applicant was said not to be suitable.
Held: The burden of proof is on the Applicant in applications for Registration.
[2004] EWHC 440 (Admin)
England and Wales
Cited – SJ v Ofsted CST 22-Dec-2004
The respondent had refused the applicant a registration as a child minder. She appealed but had to ask for adjournment to find public funding to assist her in making the application. Legal Aid not being generally available, the adjournment was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 October 2022; Ref: scu.194700
Challenge to exclusion of student with Aspergers Syndrome after assault on teacher.
[2007] EWHC 763 (Admin)
Disability Discrimination Act 1995
England and Wales
Updated: 17 October 2022; Ref: scu.251469
Appeal against refusal to carry out statutory assessment of special educational needs.
Sullivan J
[2005] EWHC 862 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 14 October 2022; Ref: scu.225172
Mr Justice Chamberlain
[2019] EWHC 2667 (Admin)
Higher Education and Research Act 2017
England and Wales
Updated: 14 October 2022; Ref: scu.642701
[2019] ScotCS CSIH – 18
Scotland
Updated: 14 October 2022; Ref: scu.641123
(Whitehall Court Chamber)
[1876] UKPC 3
England and Wales
Updated: 11 October 2022; Ref: scu.418751
Stanley Burnton J considered the nature of an assessment of educational needs, saying that a tribunal in this type of case must necessarily look forward, and ‘the fact that the provision is specified on the basis of a promise or assurance as to the future rather than the existing fact is not, as a matter of law, something which prohibits the Tribunal from specifying that provision’
Stanley Burnton J
[2005] EWHC 1210 (Admin)
England and Wales
Cited – DC v London Borough of Ealing UTAA 11-Jan-2010
Tribunal procedure and practice (including UT) – statements of reasons . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 October 2022; Ref: scu.227054
[2001] EWCA Civ 1652
England and Wales
Updated: 11 October 2022; Ref: scu.218389
[2000] EWHC Admin 380
England and Wales
Updated: 11 October 2022; Ref: scu.140195
Lord Chancellor (Halsbury) and Lords Macnaghten, Shand, Brampton, Lindley
[1900] UKHL 611, 38 SLR 611
Scotland
Updated: 11 October 2022; Ref: scu.631503
(Willesden County Court) The mother applied for a specific issues order regarding the education of four children of the family and as to whether they should be taught in schools supporting strict Jewish Hassidic sect.
Million J
[2013] EW Misc 21 (CC)
England and Wales
Updated: 11 October 2022; Ref: scu.518928
[2004] EWHC 1290 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.198211
Education, Health and Care Plan – whether placement at mainstream community secondary school lawful – whether First-Tier Tribunal made fundamental errors of fact/failed to take relevant evidence into account – whether procedural unfairness – whether balancing exercise under s.9 Education Act 1996 carried out properly.
[2020] UKUT 329 (AAC)
England and Wales
Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.659514
This was a Local Authority appeal dealing with the level of specificity to be included in an Education Health and Care Plan. The provision in dispute was `[The pupil] requires extracurricular support for one hour a week at home from a trusted and familiar psychologist.’ Following on from Judge West in Worcestershire CC v SE [2020] UKUT 217 AAC, I attempt to explain, having regard to previous case law, what `enough’ detail entails in Education Health and Care Plans and when `enough is enough’.
[2020] UKUT 323 (AAC)
England and Wales
Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.659522
Hudoc Violation of Art. 5-1; Violation of Art. 5-4; Just satisfaction reserved; Judgment (Just satisfaction) Struck out of the list (friendly settlement)
A person detained as a juvenile in need of educational supervision should not be detained in a prison where no education is available. The applicant’s successive placements in a remand prison, by way of interim custody measure, amounted to unlawful detention under Article 5-1 and that he had not been able to take any proceedings satisfying the requirements of Article 5
9106/80, [1988] ECHR 1, (1989) 11 EHRR 1
Human Rights
Cited – Munjaz v Mersey Care National Health Service Trust And the Secretary of State for Health, the National Association for Mental Health (Mind) Respondent interested; CA 16-Jul-2003
The claimant was a mental patient under compulsory detention, and complained that he had been subjected to periods of seclusion.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The hospital had failed to follow the appropriate Code of Practice. The Code was not . .
Cited – Roberts v Parole Board HL 7-Jul-2005
Balancing Rights of Prisoner and Society
The appellant had been convicted of the murder of three police officers in 1966. His tariff of thirty years had now long expired. He complained that material put before the Parole Board reviewing has case had not been disclosed to him.
Held: . .
See Also – Bouamar v Belgium ECHR 27-Jun-1988
. .
Cited – Brown v The Parole Board for Scotland, The Scottish Ministers and Another SC 1-Nov-2017
The court was asked whether the duty under article 5 to provide prisoners with a real opportunity for rehabilitation applied to prisoners serving extended sentences. The prisoner was subject to an extended sentence, but had been released on licence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 October 2022; Ref: scu.165007
Mr Justice Richards
[2003] EWHC 436 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 06 October 2022; Ref: scu.185585
Appeal from special education needs tribunal
[2003] EWHC 1590 (Admin), [2004] ELR 111
England and Wales
Updated: 05 October 2022; Ref: scu.185602
Challenge to finding as to basis of payment of pension on early retirement of a teacher on the grounds of ill health.
[2012] EWCA Civ 193
England and Wales
Updated: 05 October 2022; Ref: scu.451677
(Grand Chamber) The applicants complained that the presence in all state schoolrooms of a crucifix on the wall infringed the principle of secularism. The routine presence in state school classrooms of a crucifix, which was not used for worship, religious instruction or as an expression of allegiance, was held not to contravene Article 19. Though the cross is a universally-recognised Christian symbol and a ‘self-evident manifestation’ of Christian faith. It was a passive and traditional national symbol in Italian state schools.
In deciding to keep crucifixes in the classrooms of the State school attended by the first applicant’s children, the authorities acted within the limits of the margin of appreciation left to the respondent State in the context of its obligation to respect, in the exercise of the functions it assumes in relation to education and teaching, the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.
Jean-Paul Costa, P
[2011] Eq LR 633, [2011] ECHR 2412, (2012) 54 EHRR 3, [2011] ELR 176, 30 BHRC 429
European Convention on Human Rights 3 19
See Also – Lautsi v Italy ECHR 3-Nov-2009
. .
Cited – National Secular Society and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Bideford Town Council Admn 10-Feb-2012
The claimant challenged the placing of a prayer on the agenda of the respondent’s meetings.
Held: The claim succeeded. The placing of such elements on the Agenda was outside the powers given to the Council, and the action was ultra vires: . .
Cited – Eweida And Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Jan-2013
Eweida_ukECHR2013
The named claimant had been employed by British Airways. She was a committed Christian and wished to wear a small crucifix on a chain around her neck. This breached the then dress code and she was dismissed. Her appeals had failed. Other claimants . .
Cited – Nicklinson and Another, Regina (on The Application of) SC 25-Jun-2014
Criminality of Assisting Suicide not Infringing
The court was asked: ‘whether the present state of the law of England and Wales relating to assisting suicide infringes the European Convention on Human Rights, and whether the code published by the Director of Public Prosecutions relating to . .
Cited – Barclay and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Others SC 22-Oct-2014
Constitutional Status of Chanel Islands considered
The Court was asked as to the role, if any, of the courts of England and Wales (including the Supreme Court) in the legislative process of one of the Channel Islands. It raised fundamental questions about the constitutional relationship between the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 October 2022; Ref: scu.451407
The applicants, intending university students, challenged the decision to raise to andpound;9,000 per annum, the fees which might be charged by qualifying universities.
Elias LJ said: ‘Contrary to a submission advanced by Ms Mountfield, I do not accept that this means that it is for the court to determine whether appropriate weight has been given to the duty. Provided the court is satisfied that there has been a rigorous consideration of the duty, so that there is a proper appreciation of the potential impact of the decision on equality objectives and the desirability of promoting them, then . . it is for the decision maker to decide how much weight should be given to the various factors informing the decision.
The concept of ‘due regard’ requires the court to ensure that there has been a proper and conscientious focus on the statutory criteria, but if that is done, the court cannot interfere with the decision simply because it would have given greater weight to the equality implications of the decision than did the decision maker. In short, the decision maker must be clear precisely what the equality implications are when he puts them in the balance, and he must recognise the desirability of achieving them, but ultimately it is for him to decide what weight they should be given in the light of all relevant factors. If Ms Mountfield’s submissions on this point were correct, it would allow unelected judges to review on substantive merits grounds almost all aspects of public decision making.’
. . And ‘It is also alleged that the PSED in this case involves a duty of inquiry. The submission is that the combination of the principles in Secretary of State for Education and Science v Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council . . and the duty of due regard under the statute requires public authorities to be properly informed before taking a decision. If the relevant material is not available, there will be a duty to acquire it and this will frequently mean than some further consultation with appropriate groups is required. ‘
Elias LJ, King J
[2012] EWHC 201 (Admin)
Higher Education (Basic Amount) Regulations 2010 (SI 2010/3021), Higher Education (Higher Amount) Regulations 2010 (SI 2010/3020), Higher Education Act 2004 24
England and Wales
Cited – Brown, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Admn 18-Dec-2008
Having ‘due regard’ is not Obligation to do
The claimant sought to challenge the decision to close her local post office on the basis that being retired and disabled and without a car in a rural area, the office was essential and the decision unsupportable. In particular she challenged the . .
Cited – Hotak and Others v London Borough of Southwark and Another SC 13-May-2015
The court was asked as to the duty of local housing authorities towards homeless people who claim to be ‘vulnerable’, and therefore to have ‘a priority need’ for the provision of housing accommodation under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996. Those . .
Cited – Jewish Rights Watch (T/A Jewish Human Rights Watch), Regina (on The Application of) v Leicester City Council Admn 28-Jun-2016
The claimant challenged the legaity of resolutions passed by three local authorities which were critical of the State of Israel. They said that the resolultions infringed the Public Sector Equality Duty under section 149 of the 2010 Act, and also . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 October 2022; Ref: scu.451389
Judge Gilbart QC
[2012] EWHC 203 (Admin)
Updated: 05 October 2022; Ref: scu.451361
Lord Neuberger MR, Richards, Davis LJJ
[2012] EWCA Civ 346
England and Wales
Updated: 05 October 2022; Ref: scu.452196
Special educational needs – Description of special educational needs
[2011] UKUT 393 (AAC)
Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.451098
Special educational needs – Description of special educational needs
David Pearl
[2011] UKUT 374 (AAC)
Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.451106
UTIAC 1. The version of the rules in force on 6 February 2010 contained no general requirement that a student be able to follow the course for which he had been admitted.
2. The burden of proof as to change of circumstances since an entry clearance was granted lies on the respondent, and it is difficult to see that it can be discharged without some evidence of what the original circumstances were.
Blake P J
[2011] UKUT 166 (IAC)
England and Wales
Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450985
The court was asked whether the removal of a Tier 4 General (Student) Sponsor Licence issued by UKBA which enabled it to issue a visa letter or confirmation of acceptance of studies to non-EEA students lacked the necessary legislative authority because the system under which the decision was taken was contained in policy guidance, not in the Immigration Rules.
Held: Richards LJ looked at cases exploring the Pankina case, and held that the ratio had been correctly identified by Foskett J in English UK as relating to the substantive criteria for entitlement to leave to enter or remain. The particular issue was whether a substantive criterion laid down in the rules could be qualified by changeable policy guidance. Sedley LJ referred to ‘criteria affecting individuals’ status and entitlements’ saying this was the content of the substantive criteria themselves, not extraneous factors which might affect the ability of an applicant to fulfil the relevant criteria. The substantive criteria governing entitlement to leave to enter or remain as a Tier 4 (General) Student were laid down in the rules and were not supplemented or qualified by guidance. Whether the sponsor held a sponsor licence did have an indirect effect on an applicant’s entitlement, in that it affected his or her ability in practice to meet the criteria. It followed that the criteria for the grant, suspension or withdrawal of a sponsor licence would have that effect. But this was materially different from the substantive criteria and did not affect their content.
Mummery, Richards, Rimer LJJ
[2012] EWCA Civ 51, [2012] WLR(D) 21, [2012] PTSR D21
England and Wales
Cited – Secretary of State for The Home Department v Pankina CA 23-Jun-2010
Each claimant had graduated from a tertiary college and wished to stay on in the UK. They challenged the points based system for assessing elgibility introduced in 2008 after they had commenced their studies. The new rules tightened the criteria for . .
Appeal from – New London College Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 7-Apr-2011
The respondent had suspended and revoked the licence of the claimant company to enrol non-EEA students on its courses. . .
Appeal from – New London College Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 19-Oct-2010
The claimant sought interim relief in relation to it’s Tier 4 Sponsor Licence (A rating). The Secretary of State through the UK Border Agency had suspended it, jeopardising the business of the claimant, which involved the provision of education to . .
Cited – Alvi, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 18-Jul-2012
The claimant had entered as a student, and then stayed under a work permit. New rules were brought in, and because his occupation as a physiotherapy assistant was not listed, he was not credited with sufficient points for a permit. The Court of . .
Cited – Manchester College of Accountancy and Management, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 1-Mar-2013
The college appealed against the revocation of its Tier 4 General (Student) Sponsor Licence.
Held: The challenge failed: ‘the Defendant was entitled on the evidence to conclude that the Claimant was not properly monitoring its students’ . .
Appeal from – New London College Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 17-Jul-2013
The Court was asked as to: ‘the system for licensing educational institutions to sponsor students from outside the European Economic Area under Tier 4 of the current points-based system of immigration control.’ The appellant’s license to sponsor . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450536
Special educational needs
[2012] UKUT 283 (AAC)
England and Wales
Updated: 29 September 2022; Ref: scu.466764
Special educational needs
[2004] EWHC 560 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 29 September 2022; Ref: scu.195555
Challenge to the decision of the defendant, North Yorkshire County Council, as local education authority in its role as admission authority, to admit BC to reception class at a local primary school in the current academic year 2014/15 but only on the basis that he is admitted outside his chronological age group.
Goss QC HHJ
[2014] EWHC 3335 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 28 September 2022; Ref: scu.545128
Special educational needs – Special educational provision – naming school
[2012] UKUT 328 (AAC)
England and Wales
Updated: 28 September 2022; Ref: scu.466775
[2001] EWCA Civ 1014
England and Wales
Updated: 27 September 2022; Ref: scu.218260
Claim by three claimants challenging decisions by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary of State for Education relating to the provision of funding for special educational needs.
The Honourable Mr Justice Lewis
[2019] EWHC 2609 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 25 September 2022; Ref: scu.642721
Mummery, Hooper, McFarlane LJJ
[2011] EWCA Civ 1236
England and Wales
Updated: 25 September 2022; Ref: scu.447613
Miss Singh challenged her school’s policy which operated to prevent her wearing while at school a steel bangle, a Kara. She said this was part of her religion as a Sikh.
Held: Earlier comparable applications had been made under human rights law, but this was under the 1976 Act. The evidence established that the Sikh religion required adherents to show the five outward signs of Sikhism which included the Kara. The court had to establish was ‘whether the claimant is placed under a great ‘disadvantage’ or has suffered a ‘detriment’ because she was unable to wear the Kara which she regarded as a manifestation of her religion and race of exceptional importance. ‘In this case it was too high to only accept a requirement that she shoud wear the kara.’ The court had ‘little doubt that the claimant genuinely and honestly attaches exceptional importance to wearing her Kara and thereby satisfies the subjective requirement.’ The evidence also suggested that the bangle was of sufficient significance to Sikhs. The claimant therefore suffered the detriment required. In setting the policy, the school did not consider its duties under its own anti-discrimination policy and expressly excluded consideration of it. The claim succeeded.
In judicial review proceedings, the court: ‘must proceed on the factual basis put forward by the defendant or resolve any disputes of fact in the defendant’s favour. This principle has been frequently applied.’
Silber J
[2008] EWHC 1865 (Admin), [2008] ELR 561, [2008] FCR 203
Race Relations Act 1976 1(1A), Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000, International Covenant on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
England and Wales
Cited – Begum (otherwise SB), Regina (on the Application of) v Denbigh High School HL 22-Mar-2006
The student, a Muslim wished to wear a full Islamic dress, the jilbab, but this was not consistent with the school’s uniform policy. She complained that this interfered with her right to express her religion.
Held: The school’s appeal . .
Cited – Mandla (Sewa Singh) v Dowell Lee HL 24-Mar-1982
A private school had refused to admit the claimant, a sikh, because he would be unable to wear the school uniform. He claimed racial discrimination. The school denied that being a Sikh was a membership of a racial or ethnic group.
Held: Sikhs . .
Cited – Playfoot (A Minor), Regina (on the Application of) v Millais School Admn 16-Jul-2007
The claimant sought to be allowed to wear a purity ring at school. The ring infringed the school’s uniform code. She said that the ring expressed her desire religious to remain pure before marriage.
Held: The wearing of the ring was not . .
Cited – E v The Governing Body of JFS and Another Admn 16-Jul-2008
Application for leave to appeal. . .
Cited – X, Regina (on the Application of) v Y School Admn 21-Feb-2007
The court was asked whether a school was entitled to refuse to allow a Muslim girl to wear the niqab full face veil at school. The reasons were ‘first educational factors resulting from a teacher being unable to see the face of the girl with a . .
Cited – Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary HL 27-Feb-2003
The applicant was a chief inspector of police. She had been prevented from carrying out appraisals of other senior staff, and complained of sex discrimination.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. The tribunal had taken a two stage approach. It . .
Cited – British Medical Association v Chaudhary CA 27-Jul-2007
. .
Cited – MEC for Education: KwazuluNatal and Others v Pillay 5-Oct-2007
(Constitutional Court of South Africa) A rule which prevented a Tamil-Hindu girl from wearing a nose stud which was central to her cultural and religious identity was discriminatory on religious and cultural grounds. The court rejected an argument . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others HL 24-Feb-2005
The appellants were teachers in Christian schools who said that the blanket ban on corporal punishment interfered with their religious freedom. They saw moderate physical discipline as an essential part of educating children in a Christian manner. . .
Cited – DH v Czech Repiublic ECHR 7-Feb-2006
The claimants, 18 Roma children complained, saying that they had automatically been placed in schools for children with special needs by virtue of their racial origin. . .
Cited – Hampson v Department of Education and Science CA 1989
Balcombe LJ said: ‘In my judgment ‘justifiable’ requires an objective balance between the discriminatory effect of the condition and the reasonable needs of the party who applies the condition.’ The task of the Tribunal hearing such a complaint is . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Defence v Elias CA 10-Oct-2006
The claimant said that a scheme drawn by the defendant for compensating British civilians interned by the Japanese during the second world war was indirectly discriminatory on racial grounds by requiring a national origin link with the UK. She had . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Defence v Elias CA 10-Oct-2006
The claimant said that a scheme drawn by the defendant for compensating British civilians interned by the Japanese during the second world war was indirectly discriminatory on racial grounds by requiring a national origin link with the UK. She had . .
Cited – Regina v Camden London Borough Council Ex Parte Cran and Others QBD 25-Jan-1995
A designation of an area as a controlled parking area was vitiated by the failure of the Local Authority to consult locally. The court expanded on the principles for consultation set out in Gunning: ‘What kind and amount of consultation is required . .
Cited – Baker and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Others CA 28-Feb-2008
Dyson LJ considered the interaction between race relations law and planning permission in the context of gypsy encampments. He looked at section 71 of the 1976 Act and said: ‘In my judgment, it is important to emphasise that the section 71(1) duty . .
Cited – BAPIO Action Ltd and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another CA 9-Nov-2007
The action group appealed against refusal of a judicial review of guidelines as to the employment of non-EU doctors, saying that they were in effect immigration rules and issuable only under the 1971 Act. The court had said that since the guidance . .
Cited – Serif v Greece ECHR 14-Dec-1999
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 9; Not necessary to examine Art. 10; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award . .
Cited – Carson, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; Reynolds v Same HL 26-May-2005
One claimant said that as a foreign resident pensioner, she had been excluded from the annual uprating of state retirement pension, and that this was an infringement of her human rights. Another complained at the lower levels of job-seeker’s . .
Cited – National Secular Society and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Bideford Town Council Admn 10-Feb-2012
The claimant challenged the placing of a prayer on the agenda of the respondent’s meetings.
Held: The claim succeeded. The placing of such elements on the Agenda was outside the powers given to the Council, and the action was ultra vires: . .
Cited – Robson and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Salford City Council CA 20-Jan-2015
The appellants, all severely disabled appealed against the refusal of their judicial review of the substantial withdrawal by the Council of a service providing them with transport to local day care facilities. They said that the council had failed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 September 2022; Ref: scu.271236
Ms Collins Rice
[2019] EWHC 3129 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 September 2022; Ref: scu.645824
Care standards
[2013] UKUT 510 (AAC)
England and Wales
Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.516818
[2012] EWHC 3928 (Admin)
School Governance Procedures England Regulations 2003
England and Wales
Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.471269
The claimants sought judicial review in respect of the alleged failure of the London Borough of Croydon Council, as local education authority, to make suitable provision for their education, and more generally in respect of the alleged failings of the Council to provide sufficient secondary schooling in its area. The claimants are children, each of them 14 years of age, each an unaccompanied asylum seeker, each currently looked after by the Council under the relevant provisions of the Children Act 1989.
Lindblom J
[2010] EWHC 3391 (Admin), [2011] ELR 109
England and Wales
Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442709
Arden, Carnwath, Thomas LJJ
[2011] EWCA Civ 870
England and Wales
Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.442159
Mummery, Rimer, Sullivan LJJ
[2011] EWCA Civ 849
England and Wales
Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.442158
The claimant appealed against a decision of the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) dismissed his appeal against a decision of an Immigration Judge in turn dismissing his appeal under section 82 of the 2002 Act against the decision of the Home Secretary refusing to vary leave to remain in the United Kingdom pursuant to Rule 245Z of the Immigration Rules (post-study work).
Held: The majority’s approach in AS did not require consideration of events subsequent to the Secretary of State’s decision.
Pill, Toulson, Sullivan LJJ
[2011] EWCA Civ 833, [2011] Imm AR 832, [2012] INLR 33
Nationality & Asylum Act 2002 82
England and Wales
Cited – AS (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 20-Oct-2009
An appeal to the FTT covers not only any ground before the Secretary of State when she made the decision under appeal but also any grounds raised in response to a one-stop notice issued under section 120 of the 2002 Act, even if they had not been . .
Cited – Patel and Others v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 20-Nov-2013
The court was asked as to the respective duties of the Secretary of State and the First-tier Tribunal, on an appeal against refusal of an application to vary leave to enter or remain under the Immigration Act 1971, and more particularly as to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.441994
Special educational needs
[2011] UKUT 191 (AAC)
Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.441738
[2001] EWCA Civ 703, [2002] ELR 1
England and Wales
Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.218147
Hickinbottom J
[2016] EWHC 459 (Admin)
Schools Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013
Wales
Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.560723
Challenge to a decision of the Department of Education by which the Department refused a development proposal submitted by the applicant to increase enrolment at the school over a five year period from 580 pupils to 750 pupils
[2014] NIQB 69
Northern Ireland
Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.526659
The claimant challenged the lawfulness of alterations to the Immigration Rules and the 2003 Regulations.
Wyn Williams J
[2011] EWHC 1788 (Admin)
Immigration Act 1971 3(2), British Nationality (General) Regulations 2003, British Nationality Act 1981 41
England and Wales
Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441592
Rix LJ
[2006] EWCA Civ 831
England and Wales
Updated: 14 September 2022; Ref: scu.242667
Stanley Burnton J
[2006] EWHC 1709 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 14 September 2022; Ref: scu.243060
renewed application for permission to appeal – SEN assessment
[2001] EWCA Civ 820
England and Wales
Updated: 14 September 2022; Ref: scu.218187
Gilliatt In remitting a case to the SENT the court commented that it would be of assistance if tribunals explained their reasoning in circumstances where they considered that an expert was recommending more provision than the tribunal thought reasonable.
Mr Justice Jowitt
[1997] EWHC Admin 1111
England and Wales
Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.138056
The college appealed against the revocation of its Tier 4 General (Student) Sponsor Licence.
Held: The challenge failed: ‘the Defendant was entitled on the evidence to conclude that the Claimant was not properly monitoring its students’ attendance. I reject the Claimant’s contention that the Defendant’s determination of this issue is unlawful by reason of any unfairness in the procedure adopted by the Defendant to investigate this complaint. ‘
Supperstone J
[2013] EWHC 409 (Admin)
England and Wales
Cited – The London Reading College Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 18-Oct-2010
The claimant challenged the removal of its name from the ‘sponsor register’ for foreign students wanting to study here.
Held: Neil Garnham QC J said: ‘It has to be remembered that the primary duty about the response to breaches of a college’s . .
Cited – New London College Ltd, Regina (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 2-Feb-2012
The court was asked whether the removal of a Tier 4 General (Student) Sponsor Licence issued by UKBA which enabled it to issue a visa letter or confirmation of acceptance of studies to non-EEA students lacked the necessary legislative authority . .
Cited – New London College Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 7-Apr-2011
The respondent had suspended and revoked the licence of the claimant company to enrol non-EEA students on its courses. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.471300
[2009] UKUT 239 (AAC)
England and Wales
Updated: 11 September 2022; Ref: scu.410662
[2004] EWCA Civ 1819
England and Wales
Updated: 11 September 2022; Ref: scu.226848
A school with a religious status has no special duty to treat applicants from all religious denominations in the same manner in its admissions policy. Since it was oversubscribed, it had no statutory duty to give priority to the preference of applicants. The section is to be construed literally.
Gazette 08-Jan-1992
England and Wales
Updated: 11 September 2022; Ref: scu.88483
[2001] EWCA Civ 914
England and Wales
Updated: 09 September 2022; Ref: scu.218145
The five applicants had lived in the UK for at least three years while attending school or college. All five were subject to immigration control, four had entered as students with limited leave to remain for the duration of their studies, and the fifth had entered with his parents for settlement and had indefinite leave to remain. They challenged the refusal to allow them grants for their education.
Held: The House construed the expression ‘ordinarily resident’ in the 1962 and 1980 Acts. Long-standing authority on the meaning of the expression was referred to. The natural and ordinary meaning of ordinary residence had been settled by two tax cases. At least for educational purposes, ‘ordinary residence’ did not include a person whose residence in a particular place or country was unlawful.
Lord Scarman said: ‘Unless, therefore, it can be shown that the statutory framework or the legal context in which the words are used requires a different meaning, I unhesitatingly subscribe to the view that ‘ordinarily resident’ refers to a man’s abode in a particular place or country which he has adopted voluntarily and for settled purposes as part of the regular order of his life for the time being, whether of short or of long duration.’
This was ‘ultimately a question of fact, depending more upon the evidence of matters susceptible of objective proof than upon evidence as to state of mind’ ‘There are two, and no more than two, respects in which the mind of the ‘propositus’ is important in determining ordinary residence. The residence must be voluntarily adopted. Enforced presence by reason of kidnapping or imprisonment, or a Robinson Crusoe existence on a desert island with no opportunity of escape, may be so overwhelming a factor as to negative the will to be where one is’. And ‘local education authorities, when considering an application for a mandatory award, must ask themselves the question: has the applicant shown that he has habitually and normally resided in the United Kingdom from choice and for a settled purpose throughout the prescribed period, apart from temporary or occasional absences?’ There is an overlap between the meaning of ‘ordinary’ and ‘habitual’ residence and one is sometimes defined in terms of the other: ‘I agree with Lord Denning, M.R. that in their natural and ordinary meaning, the words [ordinarily resident] mean ‘that the person must be habitually and normally resident here, apart from temporary or occasional absences of long or short duration.’ The significance of the adverb ‘habitually’ is that it recalls two necessary features mentioned by Viscount Sumner in Lysaght’s case, namely residence adopted voluntarily and for settled purposes.’ and ‘The ordinary and natural meaning of the words supplies [a simple test]. For if there be proved a regular, habitual mode of life in a particular place, the continuity of which has persisted despite temporary absences, ordinary residence is established provided only it is adopted voluntarily and for a settled purpose.’ Purposive interpretation is only available if a judges ‘can find in the statute read as a whole or in material to which they are permitted by law to refer as aids to interpretation an expression of Parliament’s purpose or policy.’
The court allowed one exception: ‘If a man’s presence in a particular place or country is unlawful, eg in breach of the immigration laws, he cannot rely on his unlawful residence as constituting ordinary residence (even though in a tax case the Crown may be able to do so): In re Abdul Manan [1971] 1 WLR 859 and R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex p Margueritte [1982] 3 WLR 753, CA. There is, indeed, express provision to this effect in the Act of 1971, section 33(2). But even without this guidance I would conclude that it was wrong in principle that a man could rely on his own unlawful act to secure an advantage which could have been obtained if he had acted lawfully.’ ‘Unless, therefore, it can be shown that the statutory framework or the legal context in which the words are used requires a different meaning, I unhesitatingly subscribe to the view that ‘ordinarily resident’ refers to a man’s abode in a particular place or country which he has adopted voluntarily and for settled purposes as part of the regular order of his life for the time being, whether of short or of long duration.’
Lord Scarman also said: ‘If a local education authority gets the law right, or, as the lawyers would put it, directs itself correctly in law, the question of fact – ie has the student established the prescribed residence? – is for the authority, not the court, to decide. The merits of the application are for the local education authority subject only to judicial review to ensure that the authority has proceeded according to the law.’
Lord Scarman
[1983] 2 AC 309, [1983] 1 All ER 226, [1983] 2 WLR 16, [1982] UKHL 14, (1982) 81 LGR 305
Education Act 1962, Education Act 1980, Local Education Authority Award Regulations 1979 (SI 1979/889) R13
England and Wales
Cited – Inland Revenue Commissioners v Lysaght HL 1928
The taxpayer, who was living in Ireland would come regularly to England for a total of less than three months a year, and would spend a week or so in a hotel for the purpose of board meetings. The House considered the meaning of the requirement of . .
Cited – Levene v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 1928
Until 1919 Mr. Levene had been both resident and ordinarily resident in the UK. Then, for five years he spent about five months (mainly in the summer) each year, staying in hotels in the UK and receiving medical attention or pursuing religious and . .
Cited – Inland Revenue Commissioners v Lysaght HL 1928
The taxpayer, who was living in Ireland would come regularly to England for a total of less than three months a year, and would spend a week or so in a hotel for the purpose of board meetings. The House considered the meaning of the requirement of . .
Cited – In re Abdul Manan CA 1971
The applicant was a Pakistani seaman who had deserted from his ship and his presence in the UK was unlawful under the 1962 Act. He nevertheless claimed to be entitled to enter and remain as a person who had been ordinarily resident here for two . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Margueritte CA 1982
The applicant first arrived from Mauritius in 1972, and was given limited leave to enter for a few months. He over-stayed until June 1974 when he paid a short visit to France. On return he was given one month’s leave to enter, but again overstayed. . .
Distinguished – Al-Ameri v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Osmani v London Borough of Harrow (Conjoined Appeals) HL 5-Feb-2004
The applicants had been asylum seekers, and obliged to live in Glasgow. Upon losing their asylum claim, but being given exceptional leave to remain, they sought to be rehoused by the appellants. The appellants had said that the applicants having . .
Cited – Mohamed v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council HL 1-Nov-2001
Mrs M came to England in 1994 living first in Ealing and then Hammersmith. Mr M came later and lived elsewhere in Hammersmith. Hammersmith gave them jointly temporary accommodation, first in a hotel and then in a flat. They then applied under . .
Cited – Mark v Mark CA 19-Feb-2004
The husband sought to stay divorce proceedings saying that his wife was an illegal overstayer, and could not therefore establish residence either as habitual or as domicile of choice.
Held: Jurisdiction existed. The law since Shah had . .
Cited – Nessa v Chief Adjudication Officer HL 3-Nov-1999
Mrs. Nessa arrived at Heathrow aged 55 having lived all her life in Bangladesh. Her husband, Mr. Mobarak Ali, had lived in the United Kingdom from 1962 until he died in 1975 and when she arrived here, Mrs. Nessa had a right of abode. She hoped to . .
Applied – Kapur v Kapur FD 1984
The husband had petitioned for divorce. He came to England only in August 1981, and had only limited leave to stay. The court considered whether the court had jurisdiction.
Held: There was no significant difference for this purpose between . .
Cited – Mark v Mark HL 30-Jun-2005
The petitioner sought to divorce her husband. Both were Nigerian nationals, and had married under a valid polygamous marriage in Nigeria. She claimed that the courts had jurisdiction because of her habitual residence here despite the fact that her . .
Cited – M, Regina (on the Application of) v Gateshead Council CA 14-Mar-2006
The applicant had left care, but still received assistance. She was arrested and the police asked the attending social worker to arrange secure accommodation overnight. The respondent refused. The court was asked what duty (if any) is owed by local . .
Cited – YA, Regina (On the Application of) v Secretary Of State for Health CA 30-Mar-2009
The applicant was a failed asylum seeker who sought judicial review of a decision of an NHS Trust not to provide him with free care. The court was asked for guidance as to whether a health trust had a discretion to provide free health care to a . .
Cited – A, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Croydon SC 26-Nov-2009
The applicants sought asylum, and, saying that they were children under eighteen, sought also the assistance of the local authority. Social workers judged them to be over eighteen and assistance was declined.
Held: The claimants’ appeals . .
Cited – Davies and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs SC 19-Oct-2011
The Revenue had published a booklet, IR20, setting out their approach to the interpretation of the phrases ‘residence’ and ‘ordinary residence’. The taxpayer said that this was a more generous definition than the statutory one, and that having acted . .
Considered – Regina v Home Secretary, ex parte Chugtai 1995
The court considered the natural and ordinary meaning of the phrase ‘ordinarily resident’.
Held: It was a question of fact for each case. Collins J noted the example given in argument of a person who had a contract for a definite period of . .
Applied – Regina v Waltham Forest, Ex parte Vale 11-Feb-1985
The court had to decide what was the ordinary reference under the 1948 of an adult without capacity. V had been in residential care in Ireland for over 20 years, but having left there had been with her mother for two weeks. The parties argued the . .
Cited – Cornwall Council, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Somerset County Council SC 8-Jul-2015
PH had severe physical and learning disabilities and was without speech, lacking capacity to decide for himself where to live. Since the age of four he received accommodation and support at public expense. Until his majority in December 2004, he was . .
Cited – A v A and another (Children) (Children: Habitual Residence) (Reunite International Child Abduction Centre intervening) SC 9-Sep-2013
Acquisition of Habitual Residence
Habitual residence can in principle be lost and another habitual residence acquired on the same day.
Held: The provisions giving the courts of a member state jurisdiction also apply where there is an alternative jurisdiction in a non-member . .
Cited – Tigere, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills SC 29-Jul-2015
After increasing university fees, the student loan system was part funded by the government. They introduced limits to the availability of such loans, and a student must have been lawfully ordinarily resident in the UK for three years before the day . .
Cited – JSC BTA Bank v Khrapunov SC 21-Mar-2018
A had been chairman of the claimant bank. After removal, A fled to the UK, obtaining asylum. The bank then claimed embezzlement, and was sentenced for contempt after failing to disclose assets when ordered, but fled the UK. The Appellant, K, was A’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 September 2022; Ref: scu.200334
Oral application by the claimant for permission to bring judicial review proceedings to challenge the lawfulness of guidance issued by the Charity Commission (‘the Commission’) regarding the operation of the public benefit test in the law of charity, as it has application in relation to independent schools.
Sales J
[2010] EWHC 2604 (Admin), [2011] ACD 2
England and Wales
Updated: 08 September 2022; Ref: scu.434932
The claimant challenged the scheme set out for procurement when making arrangements with a sponsor for establishing a school as an Academy school. . The main ground of challenge was that the procurement did not comply with the Public Contracts Regulations 2006.
Held: Arden LJ dismissed that ground substantively. She went on, however, to consider whether the claimant had standing, albeit the issue was ‘academic’. Arden LJ considered three bases on which the claimant asserted standing. First, it was said that she would have standing to bring a common law challenge to the rationality of the decision; and, that being so, the EU principle of equivalence meant that she must also have standing to complain about breach of the procurement regime. This argument was rejected at, because a rationality challenge was insufficiently similar to a challenge under the Regulations.
It was said that the issue was an important one, which ought to be capable of being tested in judicial review proceedings. But Arden LJ said that this was not enough to confer standing: ‘Economic operators can test the question of legality. It would drive a coach and horses through the requirement for standing if the importance of the issue justified standing in such circumstances. It would mean that people with no real interest in the question could bring judicial review proceedings.’
it was said that, if the claimant had an interest in the relief to be granted, she should be entitled to advance all available legal arguments in support of that relief. As to that, Arden LJ said: ‘Forbes J accepted the submission that a failure to comply with any of the 2006 Regulations gives rise only to a private law claim. Such a conclusion has potentially far-reaching implications. It means that a person who is not an economic operator entitled to a specific remedy under regulation 47 can never bring judicial review proceedings in respect of that failure unless he can bring himself within the exceptional type of claimant in the Law Society case. We consider that the judge’s proposition goes too far. The failure to comply with the 2006 Regulations is an unlawful act, whether or not there is no economic operator who wishes to bring proceedings under regulation 47, and thus a paradigm situation in which a public body should be subject to review by the court. We incline to the view that an individual who has a sufficient interest in compliance with the public procurement regime in the sense that he is affected in some identifiable way, but is not himself an economic operator who could pursue remedies under regulation 47, can bring judicial review proceedings to prevent non-compliance with the 2006 Regulations or the obligations derived from the Treaty, especially before any infringement takes place: see generally Mass Energy Ltd v Birmingham City Council [1994] Env LR 298, 306, cf Kathro’s case [2001] 4 PLR 83, where Richards J held that the claimants were not affected in any way by the choice of tendering procedure. He may have such an interest if he can show that performance of the competitive tendering procedure in Directive 2004/18 or of the obligation under the Treaty might have led to a different outcome that would have had a direct impact on him. We can also envisage cases where the gravity of a departure from public law obligations may justify the grant of a public law remedy in any event. However, while the court is in general bound to ask itself why a public law remedy is necessary when private law remedies are available, once permission to bring judicial review proceedings has been given, then, unless it is appropriate to deal with standing as a preliminary issue, there is likely to be little point in spending valuable court time and costs on the issue of standing. In that situation, we would not encourage the court to embark on a complex argument about standing. This will especially be the case where standing is a borderline issue.
However, in this case the observations of Richards J in Kathro’s case are particularly apposite. Ms Chandler states in her witness statement that she is sceptical about academy schools. She fears that they select the most gifted children as pupils. She is concerned that academy schools are run more like businesses than schools. Her first choice would be for her children’s school to be run by the local education authority. What Ms Chandler wants to happen is that there should be a competition to determine who should run the new school in Camden and she suggests that she should have the right to be consulted if the public procurement regime applied. In fact there would be no consultation of the kind she seeks. Ms Chandler is not challenging the Secretary of State’s decision because of any interest that she has in the observance of the public procurement regime but because she is opposed to the institution of academy schools. She is thus attempting, or seeking, to use the public procurement regime for a purpose for which it was not created. In all the circumstances, it would, in our judgment, be outside the proper function of public law remedies to give Ms Chandler standing to pursue her claim.’
Sir Anthony May P, Arden and Toulson LJJ
[2009] EWCA Civ 1011, [2010] BLGR 1, [2010] Eu LR 232, [2010] 1 CMLR 19, [2010] PTSR 749
Education Act 1996, Public Contracts Regulations 2006
England and Wales
Cited – Good Law Project Ltd and Others, Regina (on Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Admn 18-Feb-2021
Failure to Publish Contracts awards details
Challenge to alleged failures by the Secretary of State to comply with procurement law and policy in relation to contracts for goods and services awarded following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Held: The contracts had been awarded under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.375939
[2002] ELR 195, [2001] EWCA Civ 2046, [2002] 1 WLR 928
England and Wales
Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.218642
Disability discrimination in schools
[2010] UKUT 407 (AAC)
Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.433579
Parent Governors of the School disputed the appointment by the defendant of representatives to the school governors, saying that they were ineligible in that parents of current students should have been appointed in their stead if available.
Held: The duty to appoint trustees from existing parents had already been satisfied at the time of the appointment of the trustees in question, and therefore the appointments were lawful.
Sir Richard Buxton dissenting, said that the term ‘eligible’ was not defined, but was to be read as ‘fit and proper’. A person who could only be appointed if there was no parent avaiable to stand could not be described as eligible without evidence of the satisfaction of the precondition.
Rix, Janet Smith, LJJ, Sir Richard Buxton
[2011] EWCA Civ 433
School Standards and Framework Act 1998
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v Inner London Education Authority ex parte Brunyate HL 1989
A trustee with an unlimited power of appointment has an unfettered discretion in his use of the power, but the trustee once appointed owes no duty to the appointor, and must act independently as a trustee. . .
Cited – Perrin and Another v Northampton Borough Council and others CA 19-Dec-2007
The land owners had sought permission to fell an oak tree subject to a tree preservation order in order to prevent further damage from its roots.
Held: The council’s appeal succeeded. The court was asked to decide whether any works to the tree . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.432721
The court was asked ‘Can employment to provide children with techniques to deal with emotional and behavioural difficulties constitute being employment ‘in the capacity of a teacher’ or should it properly be described in some other way not incorporating the concept of teaching?’
Ward, Leveson, Pitchford LJJ
[2011] EWCA Civ 359
England and Wales
Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.431729
The claimants sought leave to bring a judicial review to oblige the respondent to continue financial support for their schooling, saying the respondent had written to make this promise.
Held: The applicants had an arguable case, and the review should continue.
Moses J
[1999] EWHC Admin 158
Education (Schools) Act 1997 22(b)
England and Wales
See Also – Regina v Department for Education and Employment ex parte Begbie Admn 12-Jul-1999
The claimant had been given an assisted place. The support was withdrawn and she sought to hold the respondent to his promise to continue support after the scheme had ended for those already receiving help. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.139422
The college appealed against revocation of its licence to act as an education college catering for overseas students.
Behrens J
[2011] EWHC 642 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 04 September 2022; Ref: scu.430841