Education - 1992

The case shown here are derived from the lawindexpro case law database. lawindexpro is a low cost case law database, with over 260,000 case listings, and over 200,000 links to full text judgments. The free service below shows the core information on the case, but is restricted in several ways. A small proportion of cases do allow access to the full lawindexpro information. These cases are selected at random, and may be different on your next visit. The active links through to lawindexpro are extremely powerful allowing full access to all linked cases.  

This page lists 4 cases, and was prepared on 28 October 2012.

Regina -v- Governors of Bishop Challoner Roman Catholic School and Another, Ex Parte C
8 Jan 1992 CA	Education
	A school with a religious status has no special duty to treat applicants from all religious denominations in the same manner in its admissions policy. Since it was oversubscribed, it had no statutory duty to give priority to the preference of applicants. The section is to be construed literally.
	Education Act 1980 6(3)(a)

B -v- Harrow London Borough Council and Another
8 Jan 1992 HL	Local Government, Education
	The claimant asked the education authority to provide education for a child with special needs. The parent expressed a preference for a school outside the authority's area. The question at issue was, when deciding whether such a placement would be an effective use of the resources, the effect of the placement on both authorities was to be considered. It was held that the Act allowed only the circumstances of the placing authority to be taken into account.
	Education Act 1996

Regina -v- Governors of Bishop Challoner RC Comprehensive Girls School and Another; Similar
15 Jul 1992 HL	Education
	An over-subscribed school was within its rights to apply its policies on admission despite the expression of parental preferences.
	Education Act 1980 7

Regina -v- Hull University Visitor, Ex parte Page; Regina -v- Lord President of the Privy Council ex Parte Page [1993] AC 682; [1992] UKHL 12
3 Dec 1992 HL Lord Browne-Wilkinson	Education, Judicial Review, Employment	Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers
	The decisions of University Visitors are subject to judicial review in that they exercise a public function. The House considered the nature and purpose of the system of judicial review: "The fundamental principle [of judicial review] is that the courts will intervene to ensure that the powers of public decision-making bodies are exercised lawfully. In all cases . . this intervention . . is based on the proposition that such powers have been conferred on the decision-maker on the underlying assumption that the powers are to be exercised only within the jurisdiction conferred, in accordance with fair procedures and, in a Wednesbury sense . . reasonably. If the decision-maker exercises his powers outside the jurisdiction conferred, in a manner which is procedurally irregular or is Wednesbury unreasonable, he is acting ultra vires his powers and therefore unlawfully." The House discarded the distinction between error of law within and outwith jurisdiction.
	Link[s] omitted