![[2025] UKUT 010 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
Heading
IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS CHAMBER
Case No: UA-2022-000934-HS NCN No. [2025] UKUT 010 (AAC)
On appeal from the First-tier Tribunal (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber)
Between:
AA
Appellant
- v -
Bristol City Council
Respondent
Before: Upper Tribunal Judge Mitchell
Decided on consideration of the papers
Representation:
Appellant: SinclairsLaw Ltd
Respondent: unrepresented at date of Upper Tribunal’s decision but previously represented by Bevan Brittan LLP
DECISION
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to allow the Appellant’s appeal against the First-tier Tribunal’s decision
- Proceedings before the First-tier Tribunal
- Late agreement that D should be educated ‘otherwise than at school’
- The hearing on 1 April 2022
- Community access and restraint: arguments
- Ms Long’s reports
- Nutrition and sleep
- The First-tier Tribunal’s decision
- stated as follows at paragraph 13
- made the following findings about D’s need to access the community, as part of his education, and related provision
- in relation to nutrition, stated
- in relation to assessment for sleep difficulties and ADHD stated
- in relation to Ms Long’s documentary evidence, stated
- Grounds of appeal
- Legislative framework
- As mentioned above, those matters are dealt with in sections B and F of an EHC Plan respectively
- Regulations
- Events following the Upper Tribunal’s grant of permission to appeal
- Local authority’s arguments
- Ground 1
- the Appellant argues (which is not accepted) that she had no opportunity to make submissions on the qualifications and expertise of the additional supervising support worker. However, the Appellant pr
- Ground 2
- Ground 3 & Ground 4
- Ground 5
- Ground 6
- Appellant’s response to the authority’s written submissions
- Ground 1
- Ground 2
- Grounds 3 & 4
- Conclusions
- Ground 1
- Ground 2
- Grounds 3 and 4
- Ground 5
- Ground 6
- Conclusions