[2025] UKUT 323 (AAC)

Again, in view of my conclusion in relation to ground 2, I can deal with this ground briefly. Most of ground 5 as it was advanced by the appellants at the hearing focused on the inadequacy of the Tribunal’s reasoning in relation to the question of whether Ali was making adequate progress at School X. These submissions were also relevant to ground 2 and I have summarised them above when dealing with that ground. I have also explained there why I consider that the Tribunal’s reasons are inadequate in that the decision is drafted as if there was no dispute on this issue, when in fact there was a substantial dispute. The Tribunal fails adequately to explain why it has rejected the appellants’ case that Ali was not making adequate progress in all areas at School X. While it was open to the Tribunal to accept the evidence of Ms J and the opinion of Ms Burns on this issue, the acceptance of this evidence simply because it found them to be credible witnesses does not adequately explain its decision in this case. The appellants had advanced specific concerns about progress as set out in their skeleton argument for this hearing and as summarised above. They had also advanced evidence of progress made at School Y that had not been made at School X. That evidence was relevant to whether progress at School X had been adequate. There was a need specifically to consider progress in relation to each of the various aspects of Ali’s special educational needs, taking into account and distinguishing the progress made at School X from that made at School Y, in order to assess whether the progress made at School X was adequate. The Tribunal needed to explain what it made of all these aspects of the case in order adequately to explain its decision.

The appellants in their skeleton argument also raised a further issue under this ground as to the Tribunal’s reasoning in relation to peer group at School X. The respondent objected to this argument on the basis that it was not included within the grounds of appeal on which I granted permission. I agree that this argument was not raised in the grounds of appeal and as the appeal has succeeded on other grounds which mean there will need to be full re-hearing in any event, I do not consider it necessary to deal with this argument. The question of whether School X will, if or when Ali returns to it, provide an appropriate peer group will need to be considered by the Tribunal at the remitted hearing.