[2025] UKUT 010 (AAC)

The local authority’s reliance on the format of Section F of the EHC Plan, in which restraint is mentioned, is unduly formalistic. The ‘provider / by whom’ column appears in Section F and is therefore part of the provision ordered by the First-tier Tribunal. The column headings within Section F are not a relevant consideration.

The local authority were required to ensure that educational provision was made by individuals who satisfied the description in the ‘by whom’ column of Section F of the EHC Plan. If the restraint wording was not considered ‘reflective of D’s needs’, why was it included in section F? The logical conclusion that follows from a requirement for support staff to be trained in restraint is that the First-tier Tribunal anticipated that there would be a need to restrain D. At the very least the Tribunal was required to engage with the reason why the provision was necessary and identify what it meant by restraint.

The Appellant informs the Upper Tribunal that she has no ‘additional submissions’ to make in relation to Grounds 5 and 6.