header-logo header-logo

01 November 2018 / Olivia Wybraniec
Issue: 7815 / Categories: Features , Discrimination
printer mail-detail

Fighting exclusion

nlj_7815_wybraniec

It’s time for schools to reflect on the discriminatory nature of excluding children with special educational needs, says Olivia Wybraniec

  • The appellants had been preventing from bringing a claim for disability discrimination against their autistic son’s school after he was excluded for aggressive behaviour.
  • The Upper Tribunal was asked to review the exception to protection from discrimination where there was a tendency to physical violence, on Convention grounds.
  • The Upper Tribunal upheld the appeal, finding the Regulations failed to balance the rights of children with special educational needs and violated their Convention right to education without discrimination.

It is a difficult reality that some children with special educational needs face school exclusions due to behaviour which is a manifestation of those very needs. Even more problematic is that those children may previously have been prevented from bringing disability discrimination claims under the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010) because of an exclusion from the EqA 2010 for cases involving physical violence. The appellant parents in C & C v The Governing

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll