The claimant was employed as a teaching assistant. He was suspended after allegations of sexual misbehaviour with boy at the school. He refused to take part in the disciplinary proceedings until the police investigation was concluded. A decision was made that no prosecution would follow. The claimant’s solicitors asked to be allowed to represent him at the hearing since the school had said its report might be submitted to the Secretary of State, but they were refused. The allegations were found proved and the matter reported. The school now appealed against a finding that legal representation should have been allowed.
Held: The relevant civil right was his right to practise his profession as a teaching assistant. This right, Lord Dyson said, would be directly determined by the decision under the Education Act 2002. G contended that the school disciplinary proceedings would have such a powerful influence on the proceedings or the proceedings under the 2002 Act as to engage article 6 in both of them.
Lord Dyson said that the principal question raised was what kind of connection was required between proceedings A (in which an individual’s civil rights are not being explicitly determined) and proceedings B (in which civil rights are being explicitly determined) for article 6 to apply in both.
Lord Hope, Deputy President, Lord Walker, Lord Brown, Lord Kerr, Lord Dyson
[2011] UKSC 39, [2011] ICR 1033, [2011] ELR 310, [2011] UKHRR 1012, [2012] 1 AC 167, [2011] 3 WLR 237, [2011] PTSR 1230, [2011] BLGR 849, [2011] 4 All ER 625, [2011] HRLR 34, [2011] Med LR 473, [2011] IRLR 756
Bailii, SC, SC Summary, Bailii Summary
Education (Prohibition from Teaching or Working with Children) Regulations 2003 4, Education Act 2002 142, European Convention on Human Rights 6
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Ringeisen v Austria ECHR 16-Jul-1971
The Austrian District and Regional Real Property Transactions Commission refused to approve the sale of a number of plots of land. The applicant challenged the refusal alleging bias and contending that his article 6 rights were violated for that . .
Cited – G, Regina (on The Application of) v X School and Others CA 20-Jan-2010
The claimant was a teaching assistant. A complaint had been made that he had kissed a boy having work experience at the school, but it had been decided that no criminal prosecution would follow. He sought judicial review of the school’s decision to . .
Cited – Fayed v United Kingdom ECHR 6-Oct-1994
The Secretary of State had appointed inspectors to investigate and report on a company takeover. In their report, which was published, the inspectors made findings which were critical of and damaging to the applicants, who relied on the civil limb . .
Cited – Buchholz v Germany ECHR 6-May-1981
The ECHR did not apply to rights determined by a constitutional court because of their constitutional nature. . .
Cited – Balmer-Schafroth and Others v Switzerland ECHR 26-Aug-1997
The applicants objected to the Federal Council, asking it to refuse to extend a licence to operate a power station. The council, from which there was no appeal, declined and extended the licence. The applicants invoked articles 6(1) and 13, arguing . .
Cited – Deumeland v Germany ECHR 29-May-1986
Although the Constitutional Court had no jurisdiction to rule on the merits of the dispute, its decision was ‘capable of affecting the outcome of the claim’.
The court considered a widow’s supplementary pension arising from her husband’s death . .
Cited – Poiss v Austria ECHR 23-Apr-1987
Hudoc Violation of Art. 6-1; Violation of P1-1; Just satisfaction reserved . .
Cited – Le Compte, Van Leuven And De Meyere v Belgium ECHR 23-Jun-1981
The applicants were suspended from practising medicine for three months by the Provincial Council of the Ordre des medecins. They appealed unsuccessfully to the Appeal Council and again unsuccessfully to the Court de Cassation. Dr Le Compte . .
Cited by:
Cited – Mattu v The University Hospitals of Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust QBD 1-Aug-2011
The claimant who had been dismissed by the defendant, asked the court to find that the defendant had failed to meet its contractual obligations as to the procedure to be followed, and that therefore the court declare the dismissal void.
Held: . .
Cited – Ministry of Justice v Parry EAT 14-Nov-2012
EAT RIGHT TO REPRESENTATION, APPROACH TO POLKEY
TRIBUNALS MAKING FINDINGS FOR WHICH THERE IS NO EVIDENCE
The Appellant employer raised five Grounds of Appeal against a decision that a dismissal was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Education, Human Rights
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.441296
