![[2024] UKUT 406 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
The School’s arguments
The School’s arguments
The Appellant’s new evidence
The School observe that the Appellant has supplied the Upper Tribunal with a number of items of new evidence. Mr Hocking argued at the hearing of this appeal that this new evidence should not be admitted. It postdates the alleged acts of discrimination and is not relevant to the issues arising on this appeal. I agree that the Appellant’s new evidence should not be admitted in these proceedings because none of it is relevant to the grounds of appeal.
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to ALLOW the appeal
- The Appellant’s claims are to be decided by a differently constituted First-tier Tribunal The First-tier Tribunal is to hold a hearing before deciding the Appellant’s claims
- Direction (3) above may be varied by direction given by the First-tier Tribunal
- Background
- Events on 19 April 2023 (re-listed hearing date)
- Tribunal’s finding that neither child was disabled for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010
- Legal framework
- Section B deals with the requirement for a person’s impairment to have a substantial adverse effect on ability to carry out normal day-today activities. Section B identifies matters that might be rele
- Section E is about disabled children. E3 addresses education
- Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber) Rules 2008 (2008 Rules)
- Grounds of appeal
- Appellant’s arguments
- Ground 1
- Ground 2
- Disposal
- The School’s arguments
- Ground 1
- Ground 2
- Conclusions
- Ground 2
- Conclusions