[2025] UKUT 323 (AAC)

Ali was born in December 2014 and is now 10 years’ old. He has a severe learning difficulty and diagnoses of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Down’s syndrome. He also has mild, bilateral, conductive hearing loss. He can walk independently but is unsteady on his feet. He is largely non-verbal and communicates mainly by gesture, vocalisation and signs.

The local authority has maintained an EHC Plan for Ali since 15 February 2019. From 2019 until the summer of 2024 he attended School X (a day maintained special school). Following the annual review of that Plan in May 2023, Ali’s parents appealed to the First-tier Tribunal seeking a 52-week residential placement for Ali at School Y (an independent special school).

The appellants’ appeal against the local authority’s EHC Plan was heard first over two days on 30 April 2024 and 17 June 2024. The First-tier Tribunal who heard the case on that occasion decided that School Y should be named in Section I and Ali accordingly transferred to School Y, starting there in September 2024.

The local authority, however, sought permission to appeal the First-tier Tribunal’s decision. By order dated 12 December 2024, the First-tier Tribunal set aside the decision and directed that the case should be reheard by a fresh panel.

The second hearing took place over two days on 3 February 2025 and 3 March 2025 before a panel comprising Judge Gough and two Specialist Members (Ms Hall and Ms Hari). The appellants were represented by a solicitor (Ms Hale) and they brought three witnesses: the Principal of School Y, another teacher from School Y and the Head of Therapies from School Y. The local authority was represented by Ms Tkaczynska of counsel, who also represents the local authority on this appeal. The local authority’s witnesses were: Ms J (HLTA and EHC Plan co-ordinator at School X), Ms Burns (Educational Psychologist), Ms Trinner (Speech and Language Therapist), Ms Amadi (Social Worker) and Mr Dhugga (a social work manager). The Tribunal had before it a bundle and supplementary bundle of evidence and some additional late evidence, with the page count totalling in excess of 1,000 pages. This included a report by Dr Grace, an Educational Psychologist instructed by the appellants, who did not attend the hearing.