KW & Anor v London Borough of Lewisham & anor

KW & Anor v London Borough of Lewisham & anor

The Tribunal gave adequate reasons for its decision, summarised the evidence and contentions, and made clear findings preferring the LEA's evidence that G's needs could be met at W school. The Tribunal was entitled to reject the need for residential provision and a waking day curriculum, and its reasons were sufficient to inform the appellants why they lost. The appeal fails.

Parties
Appellants: K. W. and V. W.; 1st Respondent: London Borough of Lewisham; 2nd Respondent: Susan Rees, Chair of Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 July 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Special Educational Needs, Disability, Tribunal Procedure, Judicial Review, Reasoned Decisions
Education Law Administrative Law Special Educational Needs Disability Tribunal Procedure Judicial Review Reasoned Decisions

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

K. W. and V. W.

Appellants

London Borough of Lewisham

1st Respondent

Susan Rees, Chair of Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal failed to give adequate reasons for rejecting expert evidence supporting residential placement for G.
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal failed to address the need for an extended school day or provision beyond conventional hours.
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal acted irrationally in concluding that G's needs could be met at a day school.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal gave adequate reasons for its decision, summarised the evidence and contentions, and made clear findings preferring the LEA's evidence that G's needs could be met at W school. The Tribunal was entitled to reject the need for residential provision and a waking day curriculum, and its reasons were sufficient to inform the appellants why they lost. The appeal fails.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appellants to pay £5,000 as a contribution towards the first respondent's costs, payable within 14 days.