| SPOTLIGHT |
The High Court has this week granted the Isle of Wight Council a certificate saying that a point of law of general public importance is involved in its recent ruling on unauthorised school absence.
In a statement the council said: “This is entirely as predicted and accordingly, as anticipated, an application will now be made to the Supreme Court seeking leave to appeal.
“The council will not be commenting further at this stage.”
Jon Platt, the parent against whom the Isle of Wight is seeking to enforce a £120 fine after he took his daughter to Florida, said on his Facebook page: “The application by the IW Council, for permission to appeal the decision made in my case on May 13th has been heard at the High Court today. Their application for permission to appeal was refused! However the IW Council and the DfE [have] already indicated their intention to appeal this decision (refusal of permission to appeal) to the Supreme Court.
“I know it all sounds crazy, and it is not easy to understand, but the High Court has effectively said that they believe the IW Council has no chance of successfully appealing this decision but they can go and ask the Supreme Court for permission to appeal. So this is not over yet, but it is a huge and important first victory.”
Platt added: “Hopefully, within the next few weeks, the Supreme Court will also refuse permission to appeal and this will all be over.”
The Isle of Wight had submitted an application to the High Court for permission to appeal after receiving a formal request to do so from the Minister for State for Schools.
The council has been seeking to enforce the fine against Platt after he took his daughter to Florida in April 2015. She missed seven days of school. The girl’s school had refused to authorise the absence.
In October last year magistrates on the Isle of Wight rejected the council’s attempt to enforce the fine. They accepted Platt’s argument that s. 444 of the Education Act requires parents to ensure their children attend school ‘regularly’ but does not put specific restrictions on taking them on holiday in term time.
Platt said his daughter’s attendance remained above 90%, even after taking into account a previous unauthorised absence where the girl was on holiday with her mother (his ex-wife).
The magistrates then asked the High Court the following question: "Did we err in law in taking into account attendance outside of the offence dates... as particularised in the summons when determining the percentage attendance of the child?"
In 2013 government regulations said head teachers should only grant leave of absence during term time in “exceptional circumstances”.
In May Lord Justice Lloyd Jones and Mrs Justice Thirlwall heard the proceedings by way of case stated.
In Isle of Wight Council v Platt [2016] EWHC 1283 they ruled in favour of Platt, saying that the magistrates had not erred in law.
Lord Justice Lloyd Jones said: “In this case, the question whether attendance had been regular could not be ascertained solely by reference to the period of absence. It was necessary to have regard to the period of absence in a wider context of attendance.
“The magistrates were bound to consider whether there was regular school attendance in the light of all the evidence including the school’s record of attendance. In this case, I note that the education authority placed before the court M’s record of attendance from 1 September 2014 to 7 July 2015. I consider that the magistrates correctly had regard to that wider picture. Moreover in all the circumstances of this case I am unable to say that their conclusion was not one reasonably open to them.”
Platt subsequently announced plans to take forward group litigation on behalf of parents who have received fines, and has set up a company – School Fines Refunds Ltd – for the purpose.
The Department for Education has committed to meeting the Isle of Wight’s costs of applying for permission to appeal, and other future costs. Counsel for the DfE made submissions in support of the application.
The DfE has told the council that if permission to appeal is granted, it would specifically seek to be joined as a party to the proceedings and take the lead in the appeal.
