LM & Anor, R (on the application of) v An Academy Trust
[2024] EWHC 2267 (Admin)
TZA, R (on the application of) v A Secondary School
11 July 2023
[2023] EWHC 1722 (Admin)
High Court
A kid was expelled from school for being violent. His mom sued, saying the school didn't follow the rules about fairness. The judge said the school did what it was supposed to do, even if it didn't write down every detail about fairness. The expulsion stood.
Key Facts
- •TZB, a 15-year-old Black Caribbean student with special educational needs, was permanently excluded from his secondary school.
- •The exclusion was due to two incidents of violence involving TZB.
- •The Headteacher made the exclusion decision, which was upheld by the Governing Body's Disciplinary Committee (GDC).
- •An Independent Review Panel (IRP) recommended reconsideration of the GDC's decision.
- •The GDC reconsidered and again upheld the exclusion.
- •The claimant (TZB's mother) challenged the GDC's reconsideration decision via judicial review.
Legal Principles
Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010
Equality Act 2010
Statutory framework for school exclusions in the Education Act 2002 and the School Discipline (Pupil Exclusions)(England) Regulations 2012
Education Act 2002; School Discipline (Pupil Exclusions)(England) Regulations 2012
Standard of reasons for public law decisions (adequacy of reasoning)
R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Doody [1994] AC 531; South Bucks District Council v Porter (No. 2) [2004] UKHL 33
Guidance on exclusions is not binding, but must be considered; Schools must act lawfully, rationally, reasonably, fairly and proportionately.
Exclusion from maintained schools, academies and pupil referral units in England (September 2017); S, T and P v Brent LB [2002] EWCA Civ 693
Outcomes
Claim dismissed.
The court found the Headteacher's decision, and the GDC's subsequent decision upholding the exclusion, to be lawful. The absence of prior written documentation explicitly detailing consideration of the PSED was not, in itself, unlawful. The GDC adequately considered the PSED and other relevant factors, and its reasons were sufficient.