Court of Appeal
Regina (D) v Bromley London Borough Council and Another
Published November 20, 2007

It was contrary to natural justice for an education appeals panel to fail to provide an excluded pupil with the opportunity to comment on exceptional circumstances or other reasons which led the panel to refuse to direct his reinstatement at the school from which he had been permanently excluded.

The Court of Appeal (Lord Justice Thorpe, Lord Justice Longmore and Lord Justice Maurice Kay) so held on September 18, 2007, when allowing an appeal from the refusal by Mr James Goudie, QC, sitting as a judge of the Queen’s Bench Division on May 10, 2007, of permission to D, applying by his father and litigation friend, to seek judicial review of the refusal by the independent education appeals panel of Bromley London Borough Council to order reinstatement of D at his former school.

LORD JUSTICE LONGMORE said that the panel found that the incidents in question did not justify exclusion. In those circum-stances, reinstatement would normally be ordered, unless there were exceptional circumstances or for other reasons it was not practical to order reinstatement under regulation 6(6) of the Education (Pupils’ Exclusions and Appeals) (Maintained Schools) (England) Regulations (SI 2002 No 3178).

The panel should have asked the school for its reasons for objecting to D’s reinstatement. It was contrary to natural justice to fail to do so, since D would not know what case he had to meet on the question of reinstatement. The matter would be remitted.

Times Recommends

• BGC 'set aside £40m to lure Tullett brokers'
• Legal aid review to ensure value
• Fears as 21 magistrates' courts face closure