The applicant’s child had been offered a place by the respondent. The offer was withdrawn.
Held: The school when deciding was entitled to look to the need for efficiency in education. On appeal, the committee may go against that need. The appeal committee refused the child’s appeal on the grounds of efficiency. Many more children had applied for places than were available, and many more had succeeded at appeal. The school needed urgently to reduce the numbers, and claimed the offer had been made without authority. Then arrangements were made to increase capacity, and two children who had been offered places withdrew. The appeal was on the ground of the school’s failure to take account of parental choice, and on the legitimate expectation created.
Held: It was impossible to describe the withdrawal of the offer as Wednesbury unreasonable, and the appeal failed.
 EWHC Admin 397
Education Act 1980 6, Education Reform Act 1988 26
Cited – Regina v Inland Revenue Commission ex parte Preston; In re Preston HL 1984
The applicant was assured by the Inland Revenue that it would not raise further inquiries on certain tax affairs if he agreed to forgo interest relief which he had claimed and to pay a certain sum in capital gains tax.
Held: Where the . .
Cited – Regina v Inland Revenue Commissioners Ex Parte Matrix Securities Ltd HL 14-Mar-1994
The applicant had obtained what it thought to be clearance from the Revenue for a complex scheme, whose effectiveness depended on whether investors would qualify for capital allowances. The Inspector initially gave a favourable assurance, but that . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 December 2020; Ref: scu.136945