Sort

• 14 Feb 2022

• Yes

  Complex

  Yes. ECHR Article 8: “1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence 2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”

  CB v LB Merton [2002] ELR 441 #20 rejected the argument that naming a residential school against parental wishes infringed the child’s Article 8 rights; the FTT had not as such ordered the child to attend the school (because compelling attendance – which might engage Article 8 - would at most be a matter for the LA if it decided to serve a school attendance order). Any challenge would then relate to that order, not to the FTT’s decision to order that the school be specified in the statement (not EHCP). That is because the naming of the school in an EHCP merely sets out the provision which the state (in the form of the LA) is offering. 

  More: Are the parents of a child with an EHCP legally obliged to send their child to the educational placement specified in that EHCP?

  Go to Glossary

  

  Noddy 'no-nonsense' Guide
  Authors: David Wolfe QC, Leon Glenister

0 This is helpful

|

Comment

Post