R v Oxfordshire County Council ex parte Pittick [1996] ELR 153

Case overview 

A parent judicially reviewed their local authority’s (LA) decision that their child’s school would have to fund the first five hours of the special educational provision specified in their child’s Statement of Special Educational Needs (an earlier version of an education, health and care (EHC) plan).   

What does this mean? 

This case confirms that LAs have an absolute obligation to secure the special educational provision  set out in an EHC plan, as set out in section 42 Children & Families 2014.  

Whilst it is not unlawful for an LA and a school to agree that part of the cost of the special educational provision set out in an EHC plan should be met from the school’s own budget, a dispute about funding between a school and an LA should never be the reason why a child or young person does not receive the special educational provision set out in their EHC plan. If the school is not able or prepared to fund the special educational provision in an EHC plan from its own resources, the LA would immediately have to meet the full cost.  

Whilst Statements have been replaced with EHC plans since this case, the principle remains the same, meaning this case is still relevant. 

No case report is available online. 

For more information see our pages on enforcing your EHC plan and complaining when the provision in an EHC plan is not made.