Mosekari v The London Borough of Lewisham

Statutory teacher induction must be completed after Qualified Teacher Status and in the prescribed order. A local authority has no general power to waive or deem satisfied the statutory induction requirement. The limited discretion under regulation 7(3) of the Education (Induction Arrangements for School Teachers) (England) Regulations 2012 permits reduction of the period to one term for a teacher with significant teaching experience. Where the statutory scheme provides no power to grant the exemption sought, continued employment cannot create a legitimate expectation that it will be granted. Stringent educational requirements may impose a substantial burden, but their application must remain proportionate to the public interest.

The applicant, a teacher employed by the London Borough of Lewisham, had obtained Qualified Teacher Status after beginning his teaching employment. He subsequently discovered that there was no record of his completing the mandatory statutory induction period. He sought judicial review of the Borough’s refusal to recognise his earlier training and experience as equivalent to statutory induction, or to grant an exemption.

The issues were whether the induction requirement had been completed in accordance with the statutory scheme, whether the Borough had power to grant the requested exemption, and whether its conduct created a legitimate expectation that the requirement had been satisfied.

1. The application for judicial review was dismissed. The applicant had not completed the statutory induction period in the manner prescribed by the regulations.
2. The statutory scheme required Qualified Teacher Status to be obtained before statutory induction could begin. The two-stage process had to occur in that order. The applicant’s earlier teaching and training could not retrospectively constitute statutory induction undertaken before QTS.
3. The Borough had no general power to exempt the applicant from the statutory requirement or to deem it satisfied. Regulation 7(3) of the Education (Induction Arrangements for School Teachers) (England) Regulations 2012 conferred only a limited discretion to reduce the usual three-term period to one term where the teacher had significant teaching experience.
4. Because the Borough lacked power to grant the exemption sought, its conduct could not create a legitimate expectation that the exemption would be granted. The Borough had acted neither irrationally nor unfairly in refusing to treat the applicant’s obligations as discharged.
5. The statutory requirements were stringent because of the public interest in properly trained and assessed teachers. Applying the proportionality approach identified in Bank Mellat v HM Treasury [2013] 3 WLR 179, the burden imposed on the applicant was justified by that public interest. The formal requirements were not capable of being waived except to the limited extent permitted by the regulations.