Haringey Independent Appeal Panel v M, R (on the application of)

An admission appeal panel must apply the School Admission Appeals Code’s two-stage process. At the first stage it reviews whether the admission arrangements were correctly and impartially applied, and independently decides whether admitting the child would cause prejudice. The prejudice inquiry is essentially objective and concerns prejudice to efficient education or the efficient use of resources. The child’s individual attributes are relevant only to the limited extent that they may create unusual demands on those matters. The panel should not treat the published admission number as an inflexible rule, but evidence that admitting an additional pupil would create management or curriculum problems may establish prejudice. At the second stage the panel balances the appellant’s case against that prejudice. Exceptionality is not the governing test, and the panel may consider the suitability of other schools which have allocated, or might be able to allocate, a place.

M sought judicial review after the Haringey Independent Appeal Panel dismissed her appeal against the refusal to admit her daughter, MC, to an oversubscribed secondary school. Haringey had offered a place at another school. The panel accepted that the preferred school had reached its published admission limit and that an additional admission would create management and curriculum problems. It nevertheless concluded that other schools could be suitable.

The Administrative Court quashed the panel’s decision, holding that the panel had applied an impermissible fixed policy and had erred in its approach to the second stage. The panel appealed. The central issues were the proper construction of the two-stage process in the School Admission Appeals Code and the nature of the panel’s function when considering whether the admission arrangements had been correctly applied.

1. Appeal allowed. The Court of Appeal set aside the High Court’s quashing order.
2. The Code required the first stage to address three distinct matters: whether the admission arrangements complied with mandatory requirements; whether they were correctly and impartially applied in the individual case; and whether admitting the child would cause prejudice. The typographical layout of paragraph 3.1(a) did not merge the third matter into the second.
3. The prejudice inquiry was essentially objective. It reflected the statutory question whether admission would prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources under School Standards and Framework Act 1998, section 86(3)(a). The individual child’s attributes could be relevant only in the limited case where they were likely to make unusual demands on the school. The inquiry did not require the panel to set a child’s talents against the prejudice to produce a finding of no net prejudice.
4. At the second stage the panel had to balance the appellant’s grounds for admission against the prejudice to the school. The reference to “exceptional” reasons did not show that exceptionality had been adopted as the governing test. Nor was it unlawful to refer generally to other schools which had allocated, or might be able to allocate, a place.
5. The challenge concerning the second matter at the first stage was unsustainable on the evidence. The evidence supported, at most, a need for a school outside the immediate neighbourhood, not a need for the particular preferred school. The panel had implicitly rejected the argument. More generally, the panel’s function on the second matter was one of review, not a de novo decision. It had to ask whether the authority’s conclusion was reasonable, particularly where the admission criterion required judgment.

The panel’s disposal of the appeal was therefore lawful.

• Court of Appeal (Civil Division): allowed the panel’s appeal and set aside the order in [2009] EWHC 2427 (Admin).
• Administrative Court, Queen’s Bench Division: Lord Carlile of Berriew QC, sitting as a deputy judge, quashed the panel’s decision and declared it unlawful.