[2024] UKUT 166 (AAC)

The appeal concerned the Appellant’s son, a boy of 9 (at the time of the decision), whom I will refer to as “S”. The decision records that S had diagnoses of autism and global developmental delay. The decision also found that S’s parents were separated and lived at different addresses; S lived with his mother during the week and stayed with his father, the Appellant, on weekends and every second Monday evening.

The appeal to the tribunal, made under s51(2)(c), was against the contents of the EHC plan made for S by the Respondent and communicated to him by letter on 11 April 2022. The appeal concerned Sections B, F, C, G, D and H1 and H2 of S’s EHC plan.

The Appellant was not legally represented at the tribunal hearing; he represented himself. S’s mother was a witness on behalf of the Respondent.

The tribunal dismissed the Appellant’s appeal.