Parents applied for secondary school places, indicating three single sex schools. This was from a clear religious conviction. The local authority allocated another place, without giving reasons, but did provide a pamphlet setting out its policy, which showed that one criterion was a preference for a single-sex school.
Held: The need to respect religious views was enshrined in the Convention. Some positive action was required by the state to accord with that right. No such action had been taken by the authority and the decision allocating the child to the school was set aside.
Judges:
Collins J
Citations:
Times 28-Feb-2002
Statutes:
School Standards and Framework Act 1998 86(1)(b), European Convention on Human Rights Protocol 1 Art 2
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Valsamis v Greece ECHR 18-Dec-1996
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of Art. 3; No violation of Art. 9; No violation of P1-2; Violation of Art. 13+P1-2; Violation of Art. 13+9; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation . .
Cited – Regina v Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council ex parte Clark, Dakin and Others CA 19-Nov-1997
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Education, Human Rights
Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.167668