SS v Proprietor of an Independent School: [2024] UKUT 29 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision by Judge Stout on 31 January 2024.
Read the full decision in .
Judicial Summary
The First-Tier Tribunal materially erred in law in its consideration of some of the claimants’ claims of failure to make reasonable adjustments contrary to ss 20, 21 and 85(6) of the Equality Act 2010 by not identifying the provision, criterion or practice (PCP) or the substantial disadvantage suffered by the child S before considering whether there had been an unreasonable failure to make adjustments.
The First-Tier Tribunal’s conclusion that the child’s subsequent permanent exclusion was justified for the purposes of s 15 of the 2010 Act was therefore also flawed as it relied in part on the Tribunal’s flawed conclusion on the reasonable adjustments claims.
The First-Tier Tribunal further erred in law in relation to a claim of discrimination arising from disability contrary to s 15 and 85(2) of the Equality Act 2010 in relation to a refusal to provide an additional therapy dog session by regarding it as determinative that the session was not required to meet the child’s needs as a disabled person, rather than considering whether the school’s reason for refusing the session was ‘something arising in consequence’ of the disability.
The Upper Tribunal also gives general guidance on the duty to make reasonable adjustments and its relationship with the Education, Health and Care Plan framework in the Children and Families Act 2014.