T v Special Educational Needs Tribunal & Anor

(Transcript of the Handed Down Judgment of Smith Bernal Reporting Limited, 190 Fleet Street London EC4A 2AG Tel No: 020 7421 4040, Fax No: 020 7831 8838 Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)

Mr John Friel (instructed by Bobbetts Mackan) for the Claimant Miss Elisabeth Laing (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the First Defendant ____________________

iii) It follows from the foregoing that in my view the Tribunal was right to distinguish C v. Buckinghamshire as it did. The court in that case was dealing with a dispute between two forms of provision at school, not with a dispute between school and non-school provision in circumstances where, as here, the school provision is appropriate and there is therefore no power under section 319 to make arrangements for non-school provision.

iv) I also reject Mr Friel's submissions that the Tribunal failed to have regard to what was said in C v. Buckinghamshire about the importance of the child's needs and best interests. The Tribunal had proper regard to those matters within the legislative framework. The Tribunal's reasoning was clear and sufficient.

ii) Since the matter was fully argued before me, however, I think it right to indicate briefly how I would decide it if it were open to the appellants to raise it now. For that purpose, of course, I must base myself on the available evidence and must disregard the fact that the evidence would have been explored further if the issue had been ventilated before the Tribunal.