Kimberly Isherwood & Ors., R (on the application of) v The Welsh Ministers

Kimberly Isherwood & Ors., R (on the application of) v The Welsh Ministers

There is no constitutional or common law parental right of excusal from RSE. The 2021 Act lawfully removed the statutory right of excusal, and the Code and Guidance do not breach A2P1 or Article 9 ECHR as they require pluralistic, objective, and non-indoctrinatory teaching. The claimants' arguments fail on all grounds.

Parties
Claimant: Kimberly Isherwood; Claimant: AXD; Claimant: Grace Patton; Claimant: Mark Thomas; Claimant: Kate Broom; Defendant: The Welsh Ministers
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Parental Rights, Curriculum Regulation, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Thought, Sexuality Education, European Convention on Human Rights, Judicial Review

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 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kimberly Isherwood

Claimant

AXD

Claimant

Grace Patton

Claimant

Mark Thomas

Claimant

Kate Broom

Claimant

The Welsh Ministers

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether there is a constitutional or common law parental right of excusal from mandatory Relationships and Sexuality Education (RSE) in Wales
  2. 2 Whether the removal of the right of excusal by the Curriculum and Assessment (Wales) Act 2021 is lawful
  3. 3 Whether the Code and Guidance on RSE breach Article 2 of Protocol 1 (A2P1) or Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

Ratio Decidendi

There is no constitutional or common law parental right of excusal from RSE. The 2021 Act lawfully removed the statutory right of excusal, and the Code and Guidance do not breach A2P1 or Article 9 ECHR as they require pluralistic, objective, and non-indoctrinatory teaching. The claimants' arguments fail on all grounds.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed