Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

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: 1960 To: 1969

This page lists 8 cases, and was prepared on 27 May 2018.

 
Hinchley v Rankin [1961] 1 WLR 421
1961
QBD

Education
A father had been rightly convicted when his son had been recorded as absent because he had not been at school when the register was closed, for "it must be regular attendance for the period prescribed by the person upon whom the duty to provide the education is laid"
1 Citers


 
In re B (Infants) [1962] Ch 201
1962


Education, Children

1 Citers


 
The Board of Trustees of The Maradana Mosque v The Honourable Badi-Ud-Din Mahmud and Another [1966] UKPC 2; [1966] UKPC 2; [1967] 1 AC 13; [1966] 1 All ER 545; [1966] 2 WLR 921; [1967] 1 AC 645; [1966] 2 All ER 989
19 Jan 1966
PC

Education
(Ceylon)
[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]

 
 Relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of languages in education in Belgium (Belgian Linguistics) No 2; ECHR 9-Feb-1967 - 1474/62; 1677/62; 1691/62; 1769/63; 1994/63; 2126/64; (1968) 1 EHRR 252; [1968] ECHR 3; [1967] ECHR 1
 
Watts v Monmouthshire County Council and Another [1968] 66 LGR 171
1968

Browne J
Education, Employment
The Plaintiff, a teacher had had a number of accidents at school and applied for and was granted a short service gratuity from the Ministry of Education being agreed to be permanently incapable of serving efficiently as a teacher of the appropriate kind. The employer did not give him any notice of dismissal. Held: Under the regulations he had been entitled to three months' notice. The teacher sued for damages, including damages in that he had not been given pay for the period of notice that would have been applicable had notice of dismissal been given. "Having regard to the correspondence, I now come to the question of whether there was frustration of this contract. It is quite clear, in my view, that the mere inability of the Plaintiff to perform his duties by reason of illness or accident does not in itself amount to frustration of the contract. The regulations regarding tenure clearly contemplate that, even if the teacher does become ill or suffers an accident, the contract shall continue in existence in spite of that. But as a matter of common sense it seems to me that an application for and acceptance by the plaintiff of a gratuity on the basis that he had become permanently incapable of serving efficiently as a teacher is wholly inconsistent with the continued existence of a contract by the County Council to employ him as a teacher and by him to serve the County Council as a teacher." After drawing attention to the Act, "I consider that it is plain that the whole basis of this gratuity is that the teacher has become permanently incapable of serving efficiently as a teacher. In my judgment, it is impossible for the plaintiff at the same time to accept a gratuity on the basis that he is permanently incapable of serving as a teacher and also to continue to serve as such. Having accepted this gratuity, the plaintiff was not, in my view, eligible to return to the service of the County Council. In my view the foundation of the contract was destroyed when the plaintiff accepted the gratuity and the contract then came to an end by frustration. If there is frustration, there is no need for either party to give any notice terminating the date of it. The determination is automatic."
Teachers' (Superannuation) Act 1925
1 Citers


 
In the case 'relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of languages in education in Belgium' 1691/62; 1474/62; 1677/62; 1769/63; 1994/63; 2126/64
23 Jul 1968
ECHR

Human Rights, Education
Hudoc Violation of Art. 14+P1-2; Just satisfaction reserved 1474/62; 1677/62; 1691/62; 1769/63; 1994/63; 2126/64

 
Manchester Diocesan Council for Education v Commercial and General Investments Ltd [1970] 1 WLR 241; [1969] 3 All ER 1593
1969

Buckley J
Education, Land
The school governors were required to obtain consent before selling land formerly used as a school. Held: The court rejected a submission that that consent was a necessary pre-requisite for a contract could be made at all: "Reliance is placed on Milner v Staffordshire Congregational Union (Inc) [1956] Ch 275 where it was held that it was unlawful for charity trustees to enter into a contract of sale under the Charity Trusts Amendment Act 1855, section 29, without the prior approval of the Charity Commissioners. In my judgment, that case is clearly distinguishable from the present case. Section 29 of the 1855 Act expressly makes any sale by charity trustees--that is, any contract for sale--unlawful unless it is made with the approval of the commissioners. The power to contract is conditional upon prior approval. The requirement of clause 4 of the 1962 scheme in the present case is quite different. By that clause the governing body is authorised to sell property comprised in the scheme but any sale - ie, any contract for sale - is required to be conditional upon ministerial approval of the price being obtained. The power to complete a sale is conditional upon prior approval, but not the power to contract. The fact that ministerial approval was not obtained until 18 November 1964, does not, in my judgment, invalidate the contract, if any, made on 15 September."
Endowed Schools Acts 1869
1 Citers


 
Crump v Gilmore (1969) 68 LGR 56
1969

Lord Parker of Waddington CJ, Cantley J
Education, Crime
Justices had found as facts, on a prosecution for non attendance of their child, that the parents had not known about relevant absences until after the event, and that there had been no neglect on their part. The justices acquitted the parents but on an appeal by the prosecutor it was held that the offence is an absolute offence and it is unnecessary to show knowledge on the part of the parents of the child’s absence or any neglect on their part. Such matters merely go to mitigation. The Divisional Court remitted the case to the justices with a direction to convict. The Divisional Court expressed a degree of sympathy with the parents.
Lord Parker of Waddington CJ said: "The real and only question here is whether the 12 occasions out of a possible 114 when this little girl was not attending school and had no reasonable excuse for not attending, amount to a failure to attend regularly.", but went on to hold that they did and that the magistrates must have been of the same opinion.
1 Citers


 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.