Decision Report Case 1/2012-13
| Decision Number | 1/2012-13 |
| Year | 2012 |
| Court | Special Education Needs Tribunal for Wales |
Disclaimer: This document is an anonymised version of the specific decision. Each case is
considered by SENTW on its individual merits, reflects the law as at the time the decision was made,
does not create precedent and should not be relied on as such.
Decision
Date of Birth: 2000
Appeal of: The Parents
Type of Appeal: Contents of a Statement
Against the Decision of: The Local Authority
Date of Hearings: October 2012
Persons Present: The Parent Parent
The Child (afternoon session)
Parent Representative IPSEA
Parent Witness Consultant
Parent Witness Principal at School A
LA Representative Educational Psychologist
LA Witness Educational Psychologist
LA Witness Specialist Teacher School B
Appeal
The Parent appeals under s.326 of the Education Act 1996 against the contents of
a Statement of Special Educational Needs issued by the Local Authority in respect
of the Child. The Statement is dated June 2011. The Appeal is in respect of Parts
2, 3 and 4 of the Statement.
The case was initially considered in June 2012 and then adjourned. Directions
were set down in a Decision in July 2012. In addition, Directions were made early
September 2012 and following a Telephone Case Management Conference in
September 2012 further Directions were given and set down dated September
2012.
This Decision takes into account the above and should be read alongside the
Decision of July 2012 and the Directions of September 2012.
Preliminary Issues
At the start of the hearing the Tribunal and the parties clarified that each had 4
bundles of evidence and in addition that each had copies of a report from the Miskin
Project dated September 2012 and a copy of an initial Children’s Assessment
relating to the Child and the Child’s family, completed by a Social Worker, dated
August 2012.
The Parent Representative applied to admit late evidence under s. 33 (3) of the
Special Educational Needs Tribunal Regulations 2001 in respect of an addendum
report from Speech and Language Therapist, dated September 2012. The report
was made available to the Tribunal and to the Local Authority on the morning of the
hearing. The report corrects a typing error contained in an earlier report of August
2
2012 and goes on to give additional clarification of the Speech and Language
Therapists opinion. The Local Authority objected to the admission of the report at
this late stage. The Tribunal decided to admit the paragraph in the report which
corrects the error in an earlier report but it refused permission to admit the
remainder of the report. The Tribunal could see no reason why the Speech and
Language Therapist could not have expressed their opinion earlier so that it was
submitted in line with the Directions from the Telephone Conference in September
and it did not consider that there were any exceptional circumstances that justified
admission at this point in time.
During the evidence given by the Head Teacher at School A, reference was made
to the examination results of School A. For ease of reference it was agreed that
written information concerning this issue would be used by the parties and the
Tribunal.
The Parties have submitted 2 agreed Working Documents. The first was submitted
following on from the Directions given at the Telephone Conference in September
2012 and is dated September 2012. The second is a later version of this document.
It was agreed that the latest version of the document, which is dated October 2012,
would be admitted into evidence and used by the parties and the Tribunal during the
hearing.
It was also reported that the Child would like to attend part of the hearing. In view
of this the parties and the Tribunal agreed that the Child should attend at the start of
the afternoon session so the Child could meet the Tribunal Panel Members
responsible for making this Decision and so the Child had the opportunity to speak
to the Tribunal and let the Tribunal know their views. It was agreed that the Child
would be accompanied by the Parent, Parent Representative and the Local
Authority Representative would also be present.
Facts
1. At the time of the latest hearings the Child was 12 years old.
2. The Facts, as outlined in the previous Decision of July 2012, relating to the
Child’s special educational needs and to the Child’s school history remain
relevant.
3. The position of each of the parties during the hearing in October 2012
remained essentially the same as that expressed at the hearing in June
2012. Details of each party’s case are summarised in the Decision of July
2012 and they are not therefore repeated here.
4. In regard to the position taken by the Local Authority, the Local Authority
Representative explained that the Local Authority has direct knowledge of
School A. The Local Authority Representative said that they had visited the
School and the Authority had placed children at the School in the past.
To continue reading
Request your trial