Do i have to submit an annual review final EHCP to the tribunal during an appeals process?
We are currently midway through an appeals process with the LA over the addition of specialist provision to my child's EHCP. We are currently on working document version 5, and there have been numerous changes and additions to sections B & F agreed by both parties; however, the appeal continues as the LA will still not put the specialist provision into the EHCP.
The problem is we have also just had an annual review. The LA issued a draft, and then a final plan, with none of the changes currently agreed upon in the appeal. They changed a lot of section A, but otherwise, the final annual review EHCP is the same as the EHCP we are appealing from the previous year (i.e. the same as working document version 1).
Do I need to submit this new Final Annual Review EHCP to the tribunal (using the Send7 form as the IPSE website suggests), or can I just ignore it and carry on discussing the Working Document version 5 with the LA, as that is the most relevant document with all the changes agreed so far?
If the annual review final EHCP is included, it would be like taking the Working Document back to revision 1 and starting again, but I’m scared that once the appeal is finally done, they will use this new annual review final EHCP to overwrite my appealed EHCP and remove the provision I have spent a year trying to add. All the information on the internet only seems relevant if you want to add the annual review EHCP to the appeal, but in this case, I don’t. I just don’t want to give the LA another weapon against us.
Thank you for any help you can give.
A: SenseCheck
- 1 Yes
- 0 No
- 0 Other
- 05 Oct 2025
-
Yes
|
Simple
Dear TS,
This is a situation that arises quite frequently during ongoing appeals, especially where a local authority issues a new final EHCP following a review of an EHCP while an existing appeal is still ongoing. Nothing in this answer should be taken as legal advice, but I can outline the general position as explained in the Noddy No-Nonsense Guide to SEN Law (2025) and current Tribunal practice.
1. Effect of a new “final” EHCP during an ongoing appeal
According to the Noddy Guide (Ch. 12, paras 12.080–12.086), if the local authority issues a new final EHCP while an appeal concerning an earlier plan is already underway, the new plan technically replaces the earlier one as the operative legal document. The SEND Tribunal therefore normally loses jurisdiction over the earlier EHCP unless the new version is formally brought into the appeal.
However, the Tribunal has discretion under Rule 5(3)(c) of the SEND Regulations 2014 to treat the appeal as continuing in relation to the new plan—in practice, this is done by submitting the new final EHCP and asking the Tribunal to treat it as the subject of the ongoing appeal, so that jurisdiction is maintained and the appeal proceeds without interruption. This prevents the appeal from being struck out and avoids the need to start again (Noddy Guide, para 12.082).
2. Submitting or not submitting the new plan
If you choose not to submit the new final EHCP issued following a review (for example, by not lodging it with a SEND7 form), the risk is that the local authority could argue that the previous EHCP you were appealing against no longer exists, and the appeal could become academically redundant. The Tribunal could strike it out, meaning you would have to lodge a new appeal against the newly issued plan.
Submitting the new plan does not mean returning to “version 1” of the Working Document. The Tribunal usually allows the parties to continue from the most recent agreed version (for example, your Working Document 5) and carry forward all the agreed wording and amendments (Noddy Guide, para 12.083).
3. Preventing the new plan from “overwriting” your appeal progress
Your concern that the new EHCP issued after a review might later be used to erase the progress made in the appeal is entirely understandable. The practical safeguard is to ask the Tribunal to direct that the new plan be treated as the operative document in the existing appeal, with your latest Working Document forming the basis of discussion. This approach keeps all agreed amendments “alive” within the same proceedings.
Alternatively, if the new plan introduces unrelated or procedural changes (for example, updates to Section A) but the substantive dispute remains the same, the Tribunal will often agree that the Working Document continues to reflect the issues in dispute. The Noddy Guide notes that the Tribunal’s overriding objective is to deal with cases fairly and justly, rather than technically (Ch. 12, para 12.084).
4. Possible suggested procedural step
In practical terms, the safest course—supported by the Noddy Guide and IPSEA’s advice—is to:
a) Submit the new final EHCP issued after a review to the Tribunal (using the SEND7 form) with a short covering note explaining that the plan has been issued during an ongoing appeal; and
b) Request that the Tribunal treat the current appeal as continuing in relation to the new plan, maintaining your existing Working Document and agreed revisions.When submitting the SEND7 form, you must also seek the views of the local authority as part of the process. In most circumstances, it would be reasonable to assume that the LA would not oppose your Request for Change (RFC), particularly where both parties have been actively working on updated versions of the plan (Noddy Guide, para 12.085).
Once the Tribunal accepts the RFC, the new EHCP becomes the operative document for the appeal, and the previous version is treated as superseded (Noddy Guide, para 12.086). This ensures continuity and prevents the local authority from relying on the new plan to end or reset the process.
5. Summary
a) When a new final EHCP is issued following a review, it generally supersedes the earlier version, and it may therefore be necessary for the Tribunal to have the updated plan formally included in the appeal.
b) Submitting the new plan by way of a SEND7 application does not necessarily mean the appeal must begin again; it is reasonable to assume that the Tribunal will allow the proceedings to continue from the most recent agreed Working Document, preserving progress already made.
c) When completing the SEND7 form, it is necessary to seek the local authority’s views as part of the process. Whether or not the LA supports the request will depend on the circumstances, though such procedural applications are often not opposed.
d) If the Tribunal agrees to the Request for Change, the new EHCP normally becomes the operative plan for the purpose of the appeal, and previous versions are treated as superseded—although the Tribunal retains discretion over how best to manage the transition.
e) Both the Tribunal’s practice and the Noddy No-Nonsense Guide to SEN Law (2025) emphasise flexibility and fairness: the central aim is to ensure that the correct and current EHCP is before the Tribunal so that the appeal can be determined justly and efficiently.
I hope this answer helps clarify the situation and gives you confidence in how to proceed. It reflects the principles set out in the Noddy No-Nonsense Guide to SEN Law (2025) (see especially Chapter 12, paragraphs 12.080–12.086).
This is not legal advice, and you may wish to seek specialist advice if you remain uncertain. I look forward to reading any other contributions that may add further insights or experiences.
Regards,
Sean Kennedy
05 Oct 2025
|
Comment