![[2023] UKUT 223 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
Why I have found that the decision erred in law
Why I have found that the decision erred in law
Section 39 – what happens when a parent requests a particular school
Section 39 is engaged in this case because Q’s parent had requested the Respondent to secure that a particular school – Woodside Academy – was named in Q’s EHC plan. Under s39(3), the Respondent had to secure that Woodside Academy was so named, unless s39(4) applied.
Section 39(4) applies in three different circumstances (applied to the facts of this case)
where Woodside Academy was unsuitable for the age, ability, aptitude or special educational needs of Q; or
where Q’s attendance at Woodside Academy would be incompatible with
the provision of efficient education for others; or
the efficient use of resources.
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to allow the appeal. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal made on 25 October 2022 under number EH303/22/00010 involved the making of an error on a point of law
- The grounds on which permission to appeal was given
- Why I have found that the decision erred in law
- The decision’s reasoning
- The parts of Section F to which the decision was alluding re: Q’s requiring “additional support”, etc
- Discussion
- Conclusion
- Conclusions