Mr and Mrs X (parents) v The Proprietor of Woodcote High School, now ‘The Collegiate Trust’ (the Responsible Body)

A tribunal may consolidate disability-discrimination complaints, but it must exercise its case-management powers fairly. Where consolidation fundamentally changes a properly arguable freestanding complaint or changes the statutory form of discrimination to be determined, the tribunal must consider whether the parties, particularly unrepresented parties, can participate effectively and require time to prepare.

A failure to maintain accurate or updated educational plans may require separate determination as discrimination arising from disability under Equality Act 2010, section 15. A finding that reasonable adjustments were made does not itself determine whether treatment was unfavourable for the distinct purposes of section 15.

The parents appealed from a decision of the First-tier Tribunal which had dismissed their daughter’s claims of failure to make reasonable adjustments and discrimination arising from disability.

At the First-tier Tribunal hearing, nine identified complaints were consolidated into six. The complaint that the school had failed to keep Individual Education Plans accurate and updated was absorbed into a broader complaint concerning differentiation. The tribunal also changed the discrimination analysis from direct discrimination to, in relevant respects, discrimination arising from disability.

The appeal was limited to whether that consolidation was unfair insofar as it prevented proper consideration of the Individual Education Plans complaint as a freestanding claim under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010.

1. Appeal allowed. The First-tier Tribunal erred in law by consolidating the complaint concerning failure to maintain accurate or updated Individual Education Plans into the broader differentiation complaint and deciding that it would not be considered as a freestanding discrimination claim.

2. Although the First-tier Tribunal had broad case-management powers under the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber) Rules 2008, those powers had to be exercised consistently with the overriding objective. The tribunal had to ensure, so far as practicable, that parties could participate fully. This was particularly important because the parents were unrepresented and disability discrimination law was complex.

3. The consolidation made two fundamental changes without adequate notice. It removed the Individual Education Plans allegation as an independent complaint and changed the legal form of the complaint from direct discrimination to discrimination arising from disability under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010. The parties had not prepared to address the different issues arising under section 15, including the possible justification defence available to the responsible body.

4. The pleadings were capable of advancing a freestanding complaint about the content, updating and adequacy of the plans, rather than solely an allegation that documents had been falsified. The claim was not clearly doomed to fail. The First-tier Tribunal’s conclusion that staff had failed to keep the plans updated remained undisturbed, and its observation that discrimination lay in the result appeared directed to reasonable-adjustment claims under sections 20 and 21 rather than the distinct section 15 question of unfavourable treatment.

5. The decision was set aside only in respect of that issue and remitted for an oral rehearing before the same panel if practicable, otherwise a differently constituted panel. The remittal was confined to whether the failure to maintain accurate or updated Individual Education Plans was disability discrimination under section 15.

• Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber): Allowed the appeal, set aside the First-tier Tribunal’s decision to the limited extent stated, and remitted the section 15 issue.
• First-tier Tribunal (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber): On 4 November 2022, under number EH306/22/00013, dismissed claims under sections 21 and 15 of the Equality Act 2010.