swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
Education - From: 1900 To: 1929
This page lists 6 cases, and was prepared on 27 May 2018.
Marshall v Graham [1907] 2 KB 112
1907
Phillimore J
Ecclesiastical, Education
Parents were prosecuted for failing to send their children to school on Ascension Day. They argued that Ascension Day was a day "exclusively set aside for religious observance" by the Church of England. Held: A Church which is established is not thereby made a department of the State. The process of establishment means that the State has accepted the Church as the religious body in its opinion truly teaching the Christian faith, and given to it a certain legal position, and to its decrees, if rendered under certain legal conditions, certain civil sanctions. The Church seeks to serve the purposes of God, not those of the government carried on by the modern equivalents of Caesar and his proconsuls. This is true even though the Church of England has certain important links with the state. Those links, which do not include any funding of the Church by the government, give the Church a unique position but not that of a department of state.
1 Citers
Nairn v University of St Andrews; HL 10-Dec-1908 - [1909] AC 147; 1909 SC (HL) 10; [1908] UKHL 3; (1908) 16 SLT 619
Hares v Curtin [1913] 2 KB 328
1913
Education
1 Citers
Bunt v Kent [1914] 1 KB 207
1914
Education
1 Citers
Osborne v Martin (1927) 91 JP 197
1927
Lord Hewart CJ, Salter J
Education
The parent had withdrawn his child from school every week for piano lessons. The court heard an appeal by the prosecutor against dismissal of a charge of failing to secure the child's attendance at school. Held: The parent had to cause the child to attend school at all times when required to do so by the bye-laws.
Lord Hewart CJ said: "It was never intended that a child attending the school might be withdrawn for this or that hour to attend a lesson thought by the parent to be more useful or possibly in the long run more remunerative. The time-table and discipline of a school could be reduced to chaos if that were permissible."
Salter J pointed out that parents were not obliged to take advantage of the free education provided by the state, but if they did, they had to take it as a whole.
1 Citers
London County Council v Maher [1929] 2 KB 97
1929
Education
The list of ermissible reasons for non attendance at school listed in the 1870 Act is non-exclusive.
Elementary Education Act 1870
1 Citers
