R v Muntham House School, ex parte R
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 29 October 1999 |
| Date | 29 October 1999 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION.
Mr Justice Richards
Education - non-maintained school - decisions not amenable to judicial review
A non-maintained school governed by section 342 of the Education Act 1996, catering for children with special educational needs children and which received most of its funding from a local authority but had no direct funding nor any arrangement with government as to admission or exclusion, analogous to assisted places schools, did not make decisions about pupils that were amenable to judicial review.
Mr Justice Richards so held in the Queen's Bench Division on October 29 when dismissing the application of R, by his father and litigation friend, for judicial review of Muntham House School's decision to exclude him from the school because of disciplinary and other problems.
HIS LORDSHIP said the school was non-maintained, not a creature of statute and not extant due to an agreement made in exercise of statutory power.
Most of its fees were paid in practice by a local education authority but it was not publicly funded in the sense of receiving grants. It was subject to a strict regime of statutory control under section 342 of the 1996 Act.
Conditions for approval extended to a wide range of matters...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R (Heather) v Leonard Cheshire Foundation
...ex p T [1995] ELR 350 and in R v Cobham Hall School, ex parte S [1998] ELR 389, and of Richards J in R v Muntham House School, ex p R [2000] LGR 255, were considered by Moses J in Servite. In that case a charitable housing association was the provider of residential accommodation to disable......
- R v Servite Houses ex parte Goldsmith
-
R (Heather) v Leonard Cheshire Foundation
...its public duty, does not automatically change into a public act what would otherwise be a private act: see, by analogy, R v Muntham House School, Ex parte R [2000] LGR 255. 59. The purpose of section 6(3)(b) is to deal with hybrid bodies which have both public and private functions. It is......
-
Poplar Housing and Regeneration Community Association Ltd v Donoghue
...its public duty, does not automatically change into a public act what would otherwise be a private act. See, by analogy, R v Muntham House School, ex parte R [2000] LGR 255. 59 The purpose of section 6(3)(b) is to deal with hybrid bodies which have both public and private functions. It is ......