Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

GH, R (on the application of) v The Mayor of London

Some kids from a religious group who go to private schools couldn't get free school meals. They sued the Mayor of London, arguing it was unfair. The judge said the Mayor had a good reason to limit the free meals to public schools because of money and other practical reasons, even though it meant some religious kids missed out. The lawsuit was dismissed.

Key Facts

  • The Claimants, four Charedi (Orthodox Jewish) children attending independent schools, sought judicial review of the Mayor of London's decision to extend a Universal Free School Meals (UFSM) scheme to state-funded primary schools only.
  • The Charedi community in Stamford Hill, where the Claimants reside, has a high percentage (97.2%) of children attending independent schools, often due to religious and cultural reasons.
  • The Claimants argued the exclusion of independent schools from the UFSM scheme was irrational, discriminatory, and breached the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED).
  • The Mayor's decision was based on limited funding, administrative complexities of extending the scheme to independent schools, and the existence of alternative support for the Charedi community.
  • The Mayor relied on existing data and impact assessments, including an Interim Equality Impact Assessment and an Integrated Impact Assessment, in making his decisions.

Legal Principles

Permission for judicial review requires an arguable ground with a realistic prospect of success and no discretionary bar.

Sharma v Brown-Antoine [2006] UKPC 57, [2007] 1 WLR 780

In fulfilling a duty of inquiry, a decision-maker must take reasonable steps to inform themselves, but the court will not intervene unless no reasonable authority could have been satisfied with the information gathered.

R (Balajirari) v SSHD [2019] EWCA Civ 673, [2019] 1 WLR 4647

The Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) under s.149 of the Equality Act 2010 requires a rigorous and open-minded consideration of equality issues, but the court will not micromanage its application and only intervenes where the approach is unreasonable or perverse.

Bracking v SSWP [2013] EWCA Civ 1345, [2014] Eq LR 60; R(SG) v SSHD [2016] EWHC 2639 (Admin); R (Hurley & Moore) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills [2012] EWHC 201 (Admin); R (Bailey) v Brent LBC [2011] EWCA Civ 1586

Indirect discrimination under Article 14 ECHR and s.19 of the Equality Act 2010 requires showing a neutrally formulated measure disproportionately affects a group sharing a protected characteristic, unless objectively justified.

R (SC) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2021] UKSC 26, [2022] AC 223

The Greater London Authority Act 1999 empowers the Mayor to act in ways that further its purposes, including promoting health and equality of opportunity, considering health inequalities and mitigating increases in health inequalities.

Greater London Authority Act 1999, ss. 30, 32, 33

Relevant sections of the Education Act 1996, 1998, 2002, 2005, and 2010 define maintained, academy, and independent schools and their funding and regulatory frameworks.

Education Act 1996, 1998, 2002, 2005, 2010

Outcomes

Permission for judicial review was refused.

The court found that none of the Claimants' grounds – concerning the Mayor's duty of inquiry, rationality of the decision, compliance with the PSED, and indirect discrimination – had a realistic prospect of success.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.