Case law: eleven important judgements
‘Case law’ is the law which is developed by the courts as they make their judgements on cases brought to them by parents who believe that either the LEA or the Secretary of State for Education is failing to fulfil their legal duties, or that the Special Educational Needs Tribunal has made an ‘error in law’ in judging their appeal.
Most cases come to court under judicial review and are heard by judges sitting in the High Court.
Not all judgements have implications for other children. The ones summarised here do, however, and IPSEA uses them regularly as part of our advice to parents.
Caution: these summaries of case law are meant to help you understand the decisions but may not accurately represent the full legal effect of a case. If in doubt, seek legal advice.
- Ex parte E: statements must not be vague
- L v Clarke and Somerset: Part 3 must specify hours
- Hereford and Worcester: transport must be non-stressful
- Surrey CC ex parte H: placement cannot be best option
- Lancashire judgement: speech therapy is an educational need
- Isle of Wight: therapies: when educational?
- Bromley: therapies can be educational based on a wide definition of education
- Crane: parents’ choice important
- Pittick: LEAs must pick up the tab if schools won’t pay
- Cumbria: a band or matrix position is not enough
- Phelps: professionals can be negligent and LEAs and schools can be vicariously liable
Back to top