K v The School & Anor

K v The School & Anor

The School did not unlawfully discriminate against A because, after receiving a health and safety report indicating that lifting and cleaning A was dangerous and unlawful without proper facilities and training, the School was justified in refusing to continue the practice. The School took reasonable steps by seeking LEA assistance and amendment of the SSEN. The responsibility for providing the necessary facilities lay with the LEA, and the School's duty was to implement the SSEN. There was no breach of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 or the Education Act 1996.

Parties
Appellant: Ms K; 1st Respondent: The School; 2nd Respondent: The Special Needs & Disability Tribunal
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Administrative Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination in Education, Special Educational Needs, Reasonable Adjustments, Health and Safety in Schools
Education Law Disability Law Administrative Law Disability Discrimination in Education Special Educational Needs Reasonable Adjustments Health and Safety in Schools

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms K

Appellant

The School

1st Respondent

The Special Needs & Disability Tribunal

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Administrative Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the School unlawfully discriminated against a disabled pupil (A) by refusing to clean and change him after a bowel accident, contrary to sections 28A to 28C of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 as amended by the Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001
  2. 2 Whether such cleaning and changing constitutes 'education or associated services' or an 'auxiliary service' under the relevant legislation
  3. 3 Whether the School was justified in its actions due to health and safety concerns

Ratio Decidendi

The School did not unlawfully discriminate against A because, after receiving a health and safety report indicating that lifting and cleaning A was dangerous and unlawful without proper facilities and training, the School was justified in refusing to continue the practice. The School took reasonable steps by seeking LEA assistance and amendment of the SSEN. The responsibility for providing the necessary facilities lay with the LEA, and the School's duty was to implement the SSEN. There was no breach of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 or the Education Act 1996.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed