Education Centre in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • AJSB v Essex County Council Worcestershire County Council Herfordshire County Council Suffolk County Council
    • Queen's Bench Division
    • 13 Jul 2007

    In my judgement, it is not equitable to extend the limitation period in this case. The question whether A2P1 confers a right to an education in accordance with the relevant SSEN, and if so, the appropriateness of an award of damages and the impact on the alleged shortcomings of judicial review in special educational needs cases, can be as easily (and more appropriately) determined in an upcoming application for judicial review made by another party as in these very late proceedings.

  • R (Begum) v Governors of Denbigh High School
    • House of Lords
    • 22 Mar 2006

    There is no shift to a merits review, but the intensity of review is greater than was previously appropriate, and greater even than the heightened scrutiny test adopted by the Court of Appeal in R v Ministry of Defence, Ex p Smith [1996] QB 517, 554. The domestic court must now make a value judgment, an evaluation, by reference to the circumstances prevailing at the relevant time ( Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2) [2003] UKHL 40, [2004] 1 AC 816, paras 62-67).

  • Ali v Head and Governors of Lord Grey School
    • House of Lords
    • 22 Mar 2006

    There is no Convention guarantee of education at or by a particular institution. The test, as always under the Convention, is a highly pragmatic one, to be applied to the specific facts of the case: have the authorities of the state acted so as to deny to a pupil effective access to such educational facilities as the state provides for such pupils?

  • R (Begum) v Governors of Denbigh High School
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 15 Jun 2004

    What to my mind is abundantly clear is that the Defendant earnestly and sincerely wanted the Claimant to attend school. The Claimant had a choice, either of returning to school wearing the school uniform or of refusing to wear the school uniform knowing that if she did so refuse the Defendant was unlikely to allow her to attend. In my judgment it cannot be said the actions or stance of the school amounted to exclusion, either formal, informal, unofficial or in any way whatsoever.

  • Maria Abramova v Oxford Institute of Legal Practice
    • Queen's Bench Division
    • 18 Mar 2011

    She is not suggesting that OXILP should have awarded her a pass. Albeit perhaps reluctantly, she is constrained to accept that she failed the course because she failed Property Law and Practice three times. The classic example of an argument concerning academic judgement would arise if a student sought to suggest that his papers should have led to the award of a first class degree rather than a 2:1. That is a debate in which a court would be very reluctant to engage.

  • R v City of Wakefield Metropolitan District Council and Another ex parte Karen Lisa Greenwood
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 29 Ene 1998

    What is I think clear is that measures taken by a local education authority which are subject to appeal before the SENT under s.326 must be directly related to the child's learning difficulties. Problems of this kind, in my judgment, will generally fall to be dealt with not under the Act of 1996, but (so far as they may be met by public provision) under social welfare measures made in other statutes and delegated legislation.

  • A v Hertfordshire County Council
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 20 Dic 2006

    Special educational provision is, in principle, whatever is called for by a child's learning difficulty. It seems to me that to adopt the first approach would be to read into the legislation a sharp dichotomy for which Parliament could easily have made express provision had it wished to do so, but which finds no expression or reflection where one would expect to find it, namely in section 312.

See all results
Legislation
  • Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015
    • UK Non-devolved
    • 1 de Enero de 2015
    ...... it carries out functions to which Chapter 4 of Part 8 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006 applies. . (2) A person is not a care provider ... . (a) young offender institutions,. . . (b) secure training centres, and. . . (c) secure colleges. . . (2) In subsection (1), "young ......
  • Care Act 2014
    • England & Wales
    • 1 de Enero de 2014
    ...... care standards; to establish and make provision about Health Education England; to establish and make provision about the Health Research ... a reference to a young offender institution, secure training centre or secure children's home,. . . (b) the reference in subsection (10) to ......
  • Teaching Council (Scotland) Act 1965
    • UK Non-devolved
    • 1 de Enero de 1965
    ......review the standards of education, training and fitness to teach. appropriate to persons entering the ...   . ( b . ) 2 registered teachers employed in further education centres,. including 1 (but not more than 1) principal;. .   . ( c . ) 9 ......
  • Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015
    • UK Non-devolved
    • 1 de Enero de 2015
    ...... . . (a) an institution that provides further education (within the meaning given by section 2(3) of the Education Act 1996), or. ... . The governor of a young offender institution or secure training centre (or, in the case of a contracted out young offender institution or secure ......
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT