TW & Anor v Hampshire County Council
[2022] UKUT 305 (AAC)
London Borough of Camden v KT
13 September 2023
[2023] UKUT 225 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal
A court case about a child's special education plan. The judge reviewing the decision found that, while there were some mistakes, they didn't affect the main decision about the plan, so the plan will stay as it is.
Key Facts
- •Appeal concerning an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) for P, a child with autism, ADHD, and dyslexia.
- •Prolonged attempt to identify a suitable EHCP for P.
- •First-tier Tribunal (FTT) decision on 21 September 2022, following a hearing.
- •Appeal to the Upper Tribunal (UT) based on the FTT's alleged misunderstanding of the local authority's arguments and errors in the EHCP.
- •Key issues: suitability of Camden Centre for Learning (CCfL), description of a school in Section F despite finding it inappropriate in Section I, reasons for dyslexia provision, and enforceability/deliverability of provisions in Section F.
Legal Principles
Local authority may arrange special educational provision outside of school (EOTAS) if inappropriate to provide it in school, after consultation with parents.
Children and Families Act 2014, Section 61
When preparing an EHC plan, the local authority must set out the name of the school to be attended by the child (Section I).
Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014, Regulation 12(1)(i)
The FTT may correct clerical mistakes or accidental slips/omissions in a decision.
Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber) Rules 2008, Rule 44
The FTT may review its own decisions.
Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, Section 9
On appeal, the UT may set aside the FTT's decision if an error of law was made. The UT may then remake the decision or choose not to set it aside.
Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, Section 12
A child has special educational needs if they have a learning difficulty or disability that calls for special educational provision. Special educational provision is additional to, or different from, that made generally for others of the same age.
Children and Families Act 2014, Sections 20(1) and 21(1)
Local authority must secure the specified special educational provision, unless the parent has made suitable alternative arrangements.
Children and Families Act 2014, Section 42
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The FTT did not err in law. While the FTT may have misunderstood some arguments, it made its own independent assessment and did not simply proceed on an agreed basis. The alleged procedural errors regarding Rule 44 and the lack of detail in Section F were not material.