This page draws together a monthly selection of articles and features supplied by LexisNexis for publication on Local Government Lawyer and Public Law Today. We also showcase other publications and resources that LexisNexis produces to support lawyers working in the public sector. To see all articles, please click here.
Slide background

Safety first?

Child safety gate 36045624 s 146x219Daljit Kaur looks at the implications for disability discrimination of a case concerning a nursery-age child prevented from accessing provision over 15 hours.

The claim (JW v Governing Body of Sinai Jewish Primary School) before the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) included allegations that the school had discriminated by not allowing JW to attend nursery in the afternoon, and stay for lunch. The School argued it was too expensive to employ another staff member to supervise JW for these sessions and was operating at a deficit, so could not ensure JW’s safety without additional resource. At Upper Tier Tribunal (UTT), further evidence showed the school’s deficit was less than originally presented at FTT.

The UTT decided that as this was relevant to the issue of proportionality, the FTT decision that no discrimination occurred in exclusion from the afternoon sessions was wrong in law because it had been materially misled. The UTT did not uphold the appeal against the FTT decision relating to no discrimination in respect of JW not being able to stay for lunch as the school was unable to recruit a suitable supervisor for the limited hours.

JW v Governing Body of Sinai Jewish Primary School [2019] UKUT 88 (AAC)

What are the practical implications of this case?

The case firstly determined that the financial position of the school when considering what should be funded as reasonable adjustments in the form of additional support was material. While a school is not required routinely to provide comprehensive financial documents, if it seeks to rely on a simple statement of its financial position, that statement should be accurate.

The fact that in this case, the information was not accurate resulted in the FTT proceeding to make decisions on that basis, without anything suggesting the contrary. While new evidence cannot be submitted at will at the UTT stage, the evidence submitted by the appellants relating to a more accurate financial position of the school was considered relevant (based on previous case law) to the extent that it was uncontentious and could not reasonably have been found by the appellants before the FTT hearing.

In addition, the failure to allow JW to attend the nursery for the afternoon session was a matter which could be considered not only under Section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 (EA 2010) but possibly also under EA 2010, s 20(5) as the phrase ‘auxiliary aid’ is to be read as also including ‘auxiliary service’ (EA 2010, s 20(11)). Under both sections the issue regarding cost is relevant–EA 2010, s 15 as to proportionality and the potential detrimental effect on the other children in the school, and EA 2010, s 20(5) in terms of reasonable steps of providing an adjustment.

What was the background?

The case related to an appeal by parents against the FTT decision that the school had not discriminated against their child when the school failed to allow him to stay for lunch or to attend the afternoon sessions of nursery. JW was in attendance at the nursery from September 2015 for the morning sessions for 15 hours and was provided with support on a 1:1 basis for this.

The appellants had requested afternoon sessions for JW, three days per week. All parents were permitted to access additional hours above the 15 hours generally available, on paying for the same. Of 42 children, 38 attended all morning, lunch and afternoon sessions. The appellants agreed JW would attend for morning sessions only, until January 2016 at which point there would be a review. However by July 2016 when the appellants brought their claim in the FTT, their request for additional sessions had still not been complied with. The Appellants then removed JW from September 2016 but continued with their claim.

The claim was unsuccessful at the FTT. The appellants appealed to the UTT in respect of the allegations that the school discriminated against JW because of his disabilities, both in not allowing him to attend in the afternoons and in not allowing him to stay for lunch.

The FTT had accepted the School’s position that JW required 1:1 at lunch and in class, as well as the School’s representations regarding its financial status. With regard to the lunch arrangements the FTT had accepted that while it was unfavourable treatment it was not discriminatory as it was proportionate given the accepted level of support JW needed, the available resources of the school in terms of finance and ability to find an appropriate member of staff.

What did the court decide?

The UTT permitted the appeal against the FTT decision relating to the exclusion of JW from the afternoon sessions. This was on the basis of new uncontested evidence submitted by the appellants at the UTT which provided a more accurate picture of the School’s financial position ie that its deficit was not as had been presented to the FTT.

Accordingly the UTT held that it was satisfied that the FTT’s decision that there was no discrimination involved in excluding JW from the afternoon sessions was wrong in law because it was materially misled. This part of the FTT decision was therefore set aside. However as JW had left the school, as had the head and as there had been changes among the governors, the UTT determined it would be disproportionate to remit the case and that it’s finding would be sufficient.

In terms of the challenge to the exclusion from lunchtimes, this was not upheld by the UTT. While the UTT held that the FTT had made an error in not considering the appellant’s offer to pay for a lunch time supervisor, and had still regarded the school’s financial position to be relevant, the UTT did not consider the error material. This was due to the fact that the school was unable to recruit a suitable member of staff for the limited hours in the time they had available.

Case details

  • Court: UK Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber)
  • Judge: Judge Rowland
  • Date of judgment: 12 March 2019

Daljit Kaur is an associate at Browne Jacobson LLP.

The views expressed by our Legal Analysis interviewees are not necessarily those of the proprietor.

LexisNexis Public Law Free Trial

More content from LexisNexis

August 07, 2020

LexisNexis Gross Legal Product (GLP) Index: Quantifying legal demand growth and the impact of COVID-19

LexisNexis has built a data model to track growth in demand for legal services – the Gross Legal Product Index, or GLP. The report provides a framework for quantifying the impact of COVID-19 on your sector.
July 31, 2020

COVID-19: What’s worrying lawyers?

Elizabeth Rimmer of LawCare examines some of the issues encountered by lawyers when working remotely during the pandemic.
June 19, 2020

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) - practice and procedure

This Property Disputes guidance note from LexisNexis provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering the jurisdiction, practice and procedure of the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber).
June 12, 2020

Quick guide to landlord’s remedies for breach of lease

The following property disputes guidance note from LexisNexis provides comprehensive and up to date legal information for commercial landlords.
June 05, 2020

The Public Law Outline 2014

This Practice Note provides practical guidance on key aspects of procedure and the PLO 2014 for public children proceedings.
May 07, 2020

Anti-social behaviour - powers to control behaviour under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014

This LexisNexis Local Government guidance note, produced in partnership with Hardwicke Chambers, provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering the powers available to control behaviour under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014
May 01, 2020

Anti-social behaviour - powers to close premises under the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014

This Local Government guidance note from LexisNexis provides comprehensive and up to date legal information outlining the powers available to local authorities to close premises where anti-social behaviour is taking place.
Coronavirus Hand sanitizer 146x219
April 24, 2020

Coronavirus – What’s the impact on the legal profession?

With Coronavirus dominating the news and the majority of Europe now entering different stages of lockdown due to the rise in uncertainties about the virus, LexisNexis has rounded up its latest articles discussing the pandemic.
Human Rights 96780326 s 146x219
April 23, 2020

Why is advancing the rule of law so important?

Have you ever considered your human rights? The Universal Declaration of Human Rights outlines our various rights under the law, the most basic being: “We are all equal before the law."But, is this really the case?
April 16, 2020

Employment law and Covid-19

This following employment guidance note from LexisNexis provides comprehensive and up to date legal information on employment law changes caused by the Covid-19 outbreak.
Roadworks 54101373 s 146x219
February 28, 2020

Road traffic – order procedure notices

This Local Government guidance note from LexisNexis provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering road traffic orders, regulations, procedures and the powers available to local authorities.
Housing Rogue Landlord 99725772 s 146x219
February 13, 2020

Obtaining possession of a secure tenancy

Produced in partnership with Karl King of Hardwicke Chambers, this LexisNexis Local Government guidance note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering the range of tenancy types for social housing and the processes involved in obtaining posession for each.
February 06, 2020

Local authority social care duties

The following Local Government guidance note, produced in partnership with Ros Ashcroft of DAC Beachcroft and Stephanie Townley of Addleshaw Goddard LLP provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering local authority duties towards social care.
January 31, 2020

Houses in multiple occupation

This LexisNexis Local Government guidance note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering the management, licensing and definition of houses in multiple occupation (HMOs).
December 13, 2019

Granting assured and assured shorthold tenancies

This practice note from LexisNexis explains the criteria for assured tenancies (AT) and assured shorthold tenancies (AST) and the exceptions to those criteria, the main terms of AT and ASTs, the position regarding succession, and summarises a landlord’s obligations in respect of energy efficiency, gas safety and other health and safety obligations, right to rent and tenancy deposits.
December 05, 2019

Assignment and succession of tenancy

Morayo Fagborun Bennett looks at the circumstances in which social housing tenancies can be transferred to another tenant.
November 29, 2019

Powers to control anti-social behaviour under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014

This guidance note provides a comprehensive and up to date overview of powers to control anti-social behaviour under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, Reform of anti-social behaviour powers (2014), Part 1 Civil Injunctions and Part 2 Criminal Behaviour Order (CBO).
Missiles 91309216 s. 146x219
October 11, 2019

Exploring the court’s power to block sale of arms to Saudi Arabia

Sue Willman, senior partner at Deighton Pierce Glynn, analyses the case of R (on the application of Campaign Against Arms Trade) v Secretary of State for International Trade (Amnesty International and others intervening) and its implications for UK arms trade.
Airport travel 3160566 640
October 11, 2019

Court rejects challenges to Heathrow expansion

Charles Streeten, barrister at Francis Taylor Building, explains how the court came to reject the claims for judicial review of the Heathrow runway expansion in R (on the application of Spurrier) v Secretary of State for Transport and other cases.
Housing family 96709182 s
October 04, 2019

Exploring the limits of public authority’s liability for children

Duncan Fairgrieve and Jim Duffy, barristers at 1 Crown Office Row, examine the Supreme Court’s decision in Poole Borough Council v GN and another that the respondent local authority did not owe a common law duty of care to exercise its functions under the Children Act 1989 to protect the appellants, who were children of a family which it had housed, from harm at the hands of anti-social neighbours.
Dead end road 32516564 s 146x219
October 04, 2019

Abandoning a procurement exercise - when can a contracting authority extinguish a challenge?

Lucy James looks at the legal effect of a decision to abandon a procurement exercise and whether it extinguishes an accrued cause of action a bidder may have against a contracting authority for breaches of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 SI 2015/102 (PCR 2015).
Education cuts 93374247 s 146x219
August 23, 2019

‘Funding crisis’ - a detailed look at the funding shortage in UK schools

According to campaigners, more than 200 schools in England are cutting their school weeks short due to funding shortages. This raises questions over legal ramifications and the responsibility of the government. Jean Tsang, associate at Bates Wells and governor of a maintained primary school, addresses these questions and looks at the worrying effects of this ‘funding crisis’ on the ‘most vulnerable children’ in the educational system.
Cost cutting 21525611 s 146x219
August 16, 2019

Judicial review challenge over closure of children’s centres defeated by local authority

The case R (on the application of L, an infant (by his mother and litigation friend)) v Buckinghamshire County Council represents the first time when the High Court considered in detail the meaning of the ‘sufficiency duty’ in section 5A of the Childcare Act 2006 (ChA 2006) in the context of whether a council’s consultation on the closure of a number of children’s centres was unlawful or not. James Goudie QC examines the background to and the practical implications of the judgment.
Market 25240022 s 146x219
August 09, 2019

How does a local authority establish a market?

The LexisPSL team outline the powers available to local authorities looking to establish a new market.
School gate iStock 000003257894XSmall 146x219
August 02, 2019

Forced academisation of schools - is resistance futile?

What are the circumstances which lead to a school being forced to become an academy, and is there anything that can be done to stop it happening? Katie Michelon provides an overview of the forced academisation process, and explains the options available to schools, parents and local authorities when faced with the possibility of an Academy Order.
Plane passenger plane 19469 640 pixabay
June 13, 2019

Home or away?

Katherine Illsley outlines how a local authority should approach the situation where a parent to be assessed for the purposes of public children care lives in another jurisdiction.
House key iStock 000004543619XSmall 146x219
June 07, 2019

Tenant Fees Act 2019 - government guidance

The government recently published guidance on the Tenant Fees Act 2019 (TFA 2019). Robin Stewart and David Smith of Anthony Gold Solicitors look at some of the key questions relating to the guidance, including enforcement, penalties and some controversial aspects such as guidance pertaining to payment of damages.
Choice 33452110 s 146x219
June 07, 2019

How should the courts approach cases with an ‘open’ pool of possible perpetrators?

Chris Stevenson, barrister at Fourteen, examines the Court of Appeal’s decision in Re B (children: uncertain perpetrator) to allow a father’s appeal against a Family Court judge’s finding that he was within a pool of possible perpetrators responsible for sexually transmitting gonorrhoea to three of his children (registration required).
Planning 146x219
May 24, 2019

Court of Appeal finds permissive housing policies can restrict development elsewhere

In Gladman Developments Ltd v Canterbury City Council [2019] EWCA Civ 669, the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal by developer Gladman against the decision of the High Court to quash planning permission granted on appeal for a residential development on a site not allocated for development, not on previously developed land, and outside the existing built-up area.
UK map 66823434 s 146x219
May 17, 2019

The changing landscape of local authority Trading Standards prosecutions?

Richard Heller considers the potential impact of Qualter and others v Crown Court at Preston [2019] EWHC 906 (Admin) could have on the way regional Trading Standards services investigate and prosecute criminal offences (registration required).
Child removal iStock 000007583512XSmall 146x219
May 17, 2019

Wish they weren't here?

Can a parent with parental responsibility object to their child, who is subject to an interim care order, being taken on holiday by their foster parents?
Housing Rogue Landlord 99725772 s 146x219
May 10, 2019

Exploring the new guidance on greater protections from rogue landlords

Jason Hobday, associate at Womble Bond Dickinson, discusses the implications of recent government guidance documents which intend to enforce greater protections from rogue landlords (registration required).
Bias iStock 000008329150XSmall 146x219
May 09, 2019

Court finds judge in Uber licensing case was not biased

Philip Kolvin QC examines the High Court’s decision in R (United Cabbies Group) v Westminster Magistrates’ Court to dismiss the claimant’s application for judicial review of a district judge’s grant of an operator’s licence for London private hire vehicles to the third interested party, Uber.
Housing timer 45568205 s 146x219
May 03, 2019

End of the road?

Morayo Fagborun Bennett looks at the Court of Appeal's decision on waiving offers of alternative accommodation and the lawfulness of an earlier review decision on a subsequent homelessness appplication in Godson v London Borough of Enfield [2019] EWCA Civ 486.
Council Tax 89947548 s 146x219
May 03, 2019

Court rejects implied duty to report change of address for council tax purposes (R v D)

Samuel Genen, solicitor at Steel & Shamash, comments on the case of R v D [2019] EWCA Crim 209 where the Court of Appeal ruled that a failure to notify the local council of a change of address for the purpose of council tax did not constitute a criminal offence under the Fraud Act 2006 (FrA 2006). (Registration required)
Evidence in Foreign Courts 71283762 s 146x219
March 22, 2019

Is it in the best interests of a child to give evidence in a foreign trial?

Katherine Duncan explains how the court, in Re X, carried out a balancing exercise in determining whether a child, who was ward of the court, should be permitted to travel out of the jurisdiction to give evidence at a foreign criminal trial.
High Courts inherent jurisdiction for the protection of vulnerable adults 95112860 s 146x219
March 15, 2019

High Court’s inherent jurisdiction for the protection of vulnerable adults

The case of Southend-on-Sea Borough Council v Meyers [2019] EWHC 399 (Fam) highlights the wide and largely unfettered nature of the power to grant injunctive relief under the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction for the protection of vulnerable adults and the difficulty surrounding the issue of how the balance should be struck between protection of a person on grounds of vulnerability and respect for their autonomy, writes Bethan Harris.