The applicant had appealed to the Special Educational Needs Tribunal. They had remitted the case to the authority for reconsideration, and the applicant again sought to appeal the authority’s decision to refuse a statement of special educational need. The Tribunal declined jurisdiction under its rules, and the applicant appealed that order.
Held: All that was required to trigger the right of appeal was an assessment and a decision not to make a statement. There was no need to drive the parents to a cumbersome judicial review. The Tribunal had full jurisdiction to decline frivolous applications, but this was not such.
Judges:
Lord Justice Simon Brown, Lord Justice Waller and Lord Justice Sedley
Citations:
Times 09-Jan-2002, Gazette 27-Feb-2002
Statutes:
Education Act 1996 325, Special Educational Needs Tribunal Regulations 1995 (1995 No 3113) 36(2)(a)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – O v Harrow London Borough Council and Another QBD 12-Jul-2001
The parents appealed a refusal of the education authority to issue a statement of special needs. The tribunal remitted it to the local authority, who issued a second and similar decision. The parents sought to appeal again. They appealed the refusal . .
Cited by:
Appeal To – O v Harrow London Borough Council and Another QBD 12-Jul-2001
The parents appealed a refusal of the education authority to issue a statement of special needs. The tribunal remitted it to the local authority, who issued a second and similar decision. The parents sought to appeal again. They appealed the refusal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Education
Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.167408
