London Oratory School, R (on the application of) v The School Adjudicator & Anor

London Oratory School, R (on the application of) v The School Adjudicator & Anor

The Adjudicator applied an excessively stringent test for departure from Diocesan Guidance, failed to provide procedural fairness in considering socio-economic discrimination, and erred in findings regarding baptismal certificates, previous Catholic education, and consultation. The School's challenges succeed in these respects; other findings of the Adjudicator stand.

Parties
Claimant: The Governing Body of the London Oratory School; Defendant: The Schools Adjudicator; Interested Party: The British Humanist Association; Interested Party: The Secretary of State for Education
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; several findings of the Adjudicator quashed.
Legal Topics
School Admissions, Procedural Fairness, Religious Schools, Consultation Requirements, Discrimination, Oversubscription Criteria
Administrative Law Education Law Public Law School Admissions Procedural Fairness Religious Schools Consultation Requirements Discrimination +1 more

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Governing Body of the London Oratory School

Claimant

The Schools Adjudicator

Defendant

The British Humanist Association

Interested Party

The Secretary of State for Education

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the School failed to 'have regard' to Diocesan Guidance under the Admissions Code
  2. 2 Whether the School's admissions criteria were socially selective and discriminatory
  3. 3 Whether the School's forms were unclear regarding 'parent' definition

Ratio Decidendi

The Adjudicator applied an excessively stringent test for departure from Diocesan Guidance, failed to provide procedural fairness in considering socio-economic discrimination, and erred in findings regarding baptismal certificates, previous Catholic education, and consultation. The School's challenges succeed in these respects; other findings of the Adjudicator stand.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; several findings of the Adjudicator quashed.

Orders

  • Adjudicator's findings on 'have regard' to Diocesan Guidance quashed for applying wrong test.
  • Adjudicator's findings on socio-economic discrimination quashed for flawed reasoning and unfair process.