Social and Education Lawyers
Legal Assistant (Social Care and Education)
Children's Commissioner inquiry finds "clear evidence" of illegal exclusions at schools PDF Print E-mail
Monday, 19 March 2012 17:13

An inquiry set up by the Children’s Commissioner for England this week claimed to have uncovered “clear evidence” of illegal exclusions at schools.

In a report called They Never Give Up On You, the inquiry team said this evidence ranged from cases where Year 11 students were sent home at Christmas and told not to come back until their exams in June, to ‘informal’ exclusions when someone was told verbally, with no correspondence with parents, to go home for a few days, or not to come back before the school has interviewed their parents.

“This informal ‘sending home’, not recorded and done ‘by the back door’ is illegal,” the Commissioner, Dr Maggie Atkinson, said.

The inquiry – the first to be undertaken by a Children’s Commissioner using powers under the Children Act 2004 – also urged the Government to reverse recent changes brought in through the Academies Act.

These saw the removal of the right of pupils and parents to appeal against unfair exclusions, and have a binding judgement given if a school has acted unfairly.

The report said the system of Independent Review Panels introduced by the 2011 Act, where panels do not have the ability to insist on reinstatement, did not offer sufficient safeguards against schools acting unreasonably or unlawfully. The new panels are also inconsistent with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, it claimed.

The report meanwhile cited allegations from a barrister specialising in education law, David Wolfe, that some academies were illegally stopping students from appealing against exclusions, “because their funding contracts are between the school and government, and do not include rights for the child or family”.

The report suggested that students should only be excluded if they are harming themselves or others, or if they are preventing others from learning. “They should not be excluded for minor breaches of school rules,” it said.

A clearly understood, consistently applied sliding scale of punishment should be used with exclusion as an “absolute last resort”, the inquiry added.

The report also recommended that:

  • The Government should conduct full research into the extent of unlawful exclusions, and investigate as a matter of urgency allegations of a breach of the law;
  • Where Ofsted finds evidence of unlawful activity in the course of an inspection, the school should automatically receive a grading of ‘inadequate’;
  • Concerted action be taken to close gaps that see children with certain backgrounds more likely to be excluded. Government statistics showed that “a Black boy from an African Caribbean background, who has SEN and is also from a low income household, is 168 times more likely to be permanently excluded from the same school than a White female classmate, who does not have SEN and comes from a more affluent household”;
  • The Department for Education issue clear and transparent guidance for the exclusion thresholds that schools use to decide on what to do when dealing with a child at risk of exclusion;
  • More should be done to improve young people and their parents’ knowledge of exclusions policy and procedures. The report claimed that many did not know their rights and so did not know when a school was acting unreasonably, "or in extreme cases, illegally".

The inquiry nevertheless concluded that most schools worked hard to cater for troubled students.

Dr Atkinson said: "For the first time schools are on record saying they had illegally excluded pupils. Due to the informal nature of such exclusions it is difficult to know how widespread this practice is but it is worth further examination. Our inquiry, which took evidence from a wide range of education partners and young people, found both good practice and serious causes for concern.

“Our report recognises that exclusion may in rare cases be a necessary last resort. It should happen only if a child is a danger to his or herself or others, or when learning is so disrupted that only exclusion is possible. But all exclusions must be within the law. They must be seen to be fair, and proven to be effective in solving the problems they are meant to address."

The report can be viewed here.


Latest News

April 16, 2014

ICO raps two councils after data breaches involving social services records

Two local authorities have given undertakings to the Information Commissioner’s Office after breaches of the Data Protection Act in relation to social services records. Read more
April 16, 2014

Council and Leader defeat £670k slander claim over childrens care homes

A High Court judge has dismissed a £670,000 claim for slander brought against a borough council and its leader by two companies that operate residential children’s care homes in its area. Read more
April 15, 2014

Family President makes adoption order in "final chapter" of C-section case

The President of the Family Division has this month made an adoption order for the baby girl at the centre of a high-profile case where the Court of Protection authorised a delivery by Caesarean section. Read more
April 11, 2014

Council fined £20,000 after autistic boy loses fingertips in school gate

A local authority has been fined £20,000 after a boy with autism and learning difficulties lost the tips of three fingers when his hand was trapped in a school gate. Read more
April 03, 2014

LGO attacks council over education of teenager with severe disabilities

The Local Government Ombudsman has criticised a local authority after a teenager with severe disabilities was denied a place at a specialist college because council officers failed to follow the proper procedure. Read more



Children portrait 146x219
April 10, 2014

Unknown causes of injuries and Ehlers Danlos Syndrome

A recent case is rapidly becoming the lead authority in Ehlers Danlos Syndrome and “unknown” causes. Tina Cook QC and Katie Phillips analyse the High Court’s ruling and the wider canvas. Read more
Child removal iStock 000007583512XSmall 146x219
March 26, 2014

Re B and what followed — the end of the story

Last year the Supreme Court handed down a key ruling on placing a child in an adoptive placement. Hannah Markham reviews recent developments following the case. Read more
March 26, 2014

Migrant children: s. 17 support for members of extended family

The High Court has dealt firmly with three arguments which are quite commonly relied upon in requests by NRPF (no recourse to public funds) individuals for support and accommodation under the Children Act 1989. Jonathan Auburn and Ben Tankel review… Read more
March 21, 2014

European children, BIIR and reporting restriction orders: Presidential guidance

William Tyler considers recent guidance from the President of the Family Division and issues surrounding reporting restriction orders, European children, BIIR and the Vienna Convention. Read more
March 13, 2014

FOI requests from heir hunters

How should local authorities deal with freedom of information requests from so-called 'heir hunters'? Ibrahim Hasan explains the options. Read more
March 05, 2014

FOIA disclosures: ‘motive blindness’ and risks to mental health

In the light of a recent tribunal ruling, Robin Hopkins considers the question of 'motive blindness' in relation to the Freedom of Information Act regime. Read more


Older news and features

Click here for full section archive

1 King's Bench Walk

Featured Jobs

CLICK HERE to search all current vacancies

Featured Courses & Events

Sign up for Courses and Events Updates

* indicates required

Services v2

Yellow pages iStock 000009762383XSmall cropTo access details of individual advertisers, please click on the relevant banner below.

To search all entries in the Local Government Lawyer Services Directory, please click here


InRealTime Translation
Legal Document Translation
No 37 Park Square Chambers
Joanna North Associates
Lextox Drug and Alcohol Testing


 Shout_to_the_top_looking_left_iStock_000006002590XSmall_98x74 Latest Blog Posts





Snap Judgement

Is the role of monitoring officer worth the risk?