RWU, R (on the application of) v A Governing Body of A Academy
[2024] EWHC 2828 (Admin)
LM & Anor, R (on the application of) v An Academy Trust
2 September 2024
[2024] EWHC 2267 (Admin)
High Court
A student was expelled from school for sexual harassment. A review panel initially overturned the expulsion, but the school's appeal was successful. A judge decided the school's second decision was fair, even though some mistakes were made the first time. The student's expulsion stands.
Key Facts
- •TM, a child, was permanently excluded from school for acts of sexual violence and harassment.
- •The initial exclusion decision was quashed by an Independent Review Panel (IRP) due to procedural flaws and failure to consider relevant matters.
- •A reconstituted disciplinary committee (RGDC) upheld the exclusion after reconsideration.
- •The claimants sought judicial review of the RGDC's decision.
Legal Principles
Principal of an academy may exclude a pupil permanently.
Section 51A(1) of the Education Act 2002, as modified by reg. 21(2) of the School Discipline (Pupil Exclusions) (England) Regulations 2012
Proprietor must decide whether to reinstate a permanently excluded pupil, considering the interests of the pupil and others.
Regulation 24 of the School Discipline (Pupil Exclusions) (England) Regulations 2012
IRP can uphold, recommend reconsideration, or quash the proprietor's decision.
Section 51A(4) of the Education Act 2002, as modified by the Regulations
Standard of proof for exclusion decisions is the balance of probabilities.
Regulation 28 of the School Discipline (Pupil Exclusions) (England) Regulations 2012
Governing body must ensure fair treatment and establish the primary facts, but can start from the headteacher's findings.
R v Dunraven School ex parte B
Judicial review test for irrationality includes decisions so unreasonable no reasonable authority could have made it, and flaws in reasoning.
A Parent, R (Law Society) v Lord Chancellor
Governing body's reconsideration should be conscientious, considering the IRP's findings, but not necessarily accepting all of them.
Exclusions Guidance, A Parent
Outcomes
Claim dismissed.
The court found no legal flaw in the RGDC's reconsideration of the Headteacher's decision. The RGDC's approach was rational and in line with legal precedent and guidance. Each ground of the claimant's challenge was rejected.