SS v Proprietor of an Independent School (Special Educational Needs)
[2024] UKUT 29 (AAC)
Mr and Mrs X (parents) v The Proprietor of Woodcote High School, now ‘The Collegiate Trust’ (the Responsible Body)
23 May 2024
[2024] UKUT 150 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal
Parents sued a school for disability discrimination. The first court combined their complaints, preventing it from properly addressing whether the school's poorly kept educational plans were discriminatory. A higher court ruled this was wrong and sent the case back to be judged fairly.
Key Facts
- •Appeal against First-tier Tribunal (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber) decision dismissing complaints of failure to make reasonable adjustments under section 21 Equality Act 2010 (EqA) and discrimination arising from disability under section 15 EqA.
- •Appellants (parents) were unrepresented at the First-tier Tribunal hearing.
- •The Tribunal consolidated nine initial complaints into six, impacting the consideration of the failure to maintain accurate Individual Education Plans (IEPs).
- •The Upper Tribunal granted permission to appeal on limited grounds: the unfairness of the consolidation and the Tribunal's failure to properly consider the IEP claim as a discrimination complaint.
- •The Respondent (school) underwent a change in proprietorship during the proceedings.
Legal Principles
Discrimination arising from disability under section 15 Equality Act 2010 requires unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of the disability; the disability need not be the sole cause.
City of Edinburgh Council v R [2018] CSIH 20
Appellate courts should assume the first instance judge knew how to perform their functions and resist substituting their discretion through narrow textual analysis.
Piglowska v Piglowski [1999] 1 WLR 1360
Appeals from expert tribunals should be approached with caution; their decisions should be respected unless there's clear misdirection in law.
Secretary of State for the Home Department v AH (Sudan) [2007] UKHL 49
Tribunals have wide discretion in case management, including consolidation of claims, but must ensure fair hearing and full participation.
Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber) Rules 2008, Rule 5(3)(b)
Under section 15 EqA, 'unfavourable treatment' means being put at a disadvantage; it doesn't require quantifiable loss or actual harm.
Equality and Human Rights Commission’s Technical Guidance for Schools in England
Outcomes
Appeal allowed.
The First-tier Tribunal erred in law by consolidating the claims in a way that prevented proper consideration of the IEP complaint as a freestanding claim of discrimination arising from disability under section 15 EqA. The consolidation fundamentally altered the nature of the claim and prejudiced the appellants.
Case remitted to the First-tier Tribunal.
The Tribunal must reconsider the issue of whether the failure to maintain accurate or updated IEPs constituted an act of disability discrimination under section 15 Equality Act 2010. The same panel will reconsider the case at an oral hearing unless reconstitution is impossible.