order of business - time limited on hearing

[keephope6]

Looking for some advice, we have been chasing our appeals clerk for order of business, they finally got back to us yesterday (hearing monday) and have said the following - i can not see anywhere in the code that they can restrict time. we are appealing on all 3 grounds. thank you
The hearing will last approximately 30 minutes and is structured as follows:

1. The case for the admission authority - The school will present a summary of its case as to why a place could not be offered to child
2. Questions to the school relating to their case by the panel and the appellant
3. Case for the Appellant – parent will present a summary of its case
4. Questions from the admission authority and panel to appellant
5. Sum up by admission authority
6. Sum up by the appellant

You will note that time is limited and that the panel will confirm that they have read the schools case and the appellants case in advance. Each party is not expected (or would not necessarily have time) to go through the case page by page but would assume the case has been read fully and would want to highlight specific issues to the panel. More time is often given to asking questions relating to the case.

IIRC from your previous thread, this is an Infant Class Size appeal.

In that case, I cannot imagine why a very long time would be required. The admission authority's case is that the law is that they can only have 30 children in the class by law, and that they have applied lawful admissions criteria correctly.

You summarise the main points of your argument, as to why the criteria are not lawful, a mistake was made and / or the decision to admit met the very high bar for being unreasonable - you don't read your whole submission, but make the key points.

They ask you questions.

You ask them questions.

Everyone sums up, you leave.

Unless you have included lots of irrelevant material that would be appropriate to a non-ICS appeal about balance of prejudice, or have envisaged an impassioned courtroom-style speech in which force of emotion sways the panel, I can't see why a straightforward ICS hearing would take a huge amount of time....

Sorry, should say 'not to admit'.

The question to ask yourself is: what is it that you think needs more than 30 minutes? Summarising your case? Asking your questions? If you think either of those might take an extended period, look critically at them - is what you say / ask relevant to an ICS appeal? I can't imagine that lots of impassioned but irrelevant material is likely to sway the panel?

Of course they can restrict time if it is reasonable to do so. Can you imagine the chaos if either school or parent was allowed to waffle on for hours dredging up all sorts of irrelevant material?

I'm sure you'll have sufficient time to present a pertinent case - they are pretty parent-friendly processes.

Thank you for the advice. As we are appealing against all 3 grounds. Am i right to assume that First stage – examining the decision to refuse admission - we tackle that part of our case first. which i can understand would take may take 30/40 minutes. as there is limited evidence or supporting evidence. What happens then? I think this is where the confusion lies

I don't know what you mean by 'all 3 grounds'.

Do you mean:

• Ground 1: a mistake was made
• Ground 2: criteria are unlawful
• Ground 3: decision is perverse / unreasonable?

So submission from admissions authority goes 'as you can see from our submission, ICS law applies here, there are 30 children admitted. Criteria are lawful, no mistake was made in applying them and there are no grounds to believe that this decision was perverse / unreasonable within the legal definition of the term'.

You ask any relevant questions.

You are then asked to make your case. You summarise:

• We believe that a mistake was made because [e.g. a mistake was made in measuring; a path which gives a shorter route was omitted]. You can see the detail in our submission.

• Further, we believe that the criteria are unlawful because [e.g. overlooks the legal requirement for an ex LAC to be given priority, and your child is an ex LAC]. You can see the detail in our submission.

• Thirdly, we believe that the decision to admit is perverse / unreasonable because [e.g. we are part of a witness protection programme, and the presence in our allocated school of the child of x has not been taken into account, and this poses a clear and present danger to our child's security]. Please see the detail in our submission.

Then questions can be put to you about all the points that have been raised.

Why would dealing with a single one take so long? It isn't a court of law, where detail is thrashed out verbally. The hearing is a chance for questioning and clarifying written material which has already been submitted and which will be taken into account in reaching the decision.

Beware of 'throwing lots of random mud in the hope that something will stick' (eg any thought that children do OK in classes of more than 30; a suggestion that restricting time for the hearing is somehow underhand / legally wrong).

In an ICS appeal, it is very clear what you have to demonstrate, so make any substantive points you have clearly and succinctly.

If in fact your main point is 'But he / she has been allocated a less good school than this one', be realistic about your chances of success and just make the points you do have as clearly as you can.

thank cantkeepawayforever for you advice.

No one is going to say "right, you've had your 30mins, stop". However, the panel chair will do their best to keep proceedings relevant and moving on.

30-45 minutes should be ample especially for ICS; realistically the first statement from the admissions authority will take a few minutes at most as it's pretty clear cut. "These are the criteria, we believe they are lawful and were correctly applied, this is where you are in terms of the list of applicants, you weren't offered a place as there were 30/60/90 children above you, and we are full". They don't need to make a case about prejudice because its ICS.

Don't read your case out word for word, the panel will have read it.

Do remember that on Ground 2, it means that the criteria are unlawful - which boils down to not giving priority to a group the Admissions Code says they must (such as LAC and former LAC) or giving priority to a group which the Code says they must not.

Remember also that most of the permitted criteria do not have to be used, schools and admissions authorities choose the ones they want to use. The existence of other possible choices does not in itself make their choice unlawful.

PatriciaHolm you always come to my aid you are wonderful :-)

We have lots of questions but of course as each question is answered it will whittle down what we have as it may get covered in another answer or will lead to more questions. As mentioned yesterday the school have been very unwilling or forthcoming with information or evidence for the sweeping general comments they have made in their case. We don't want to be rushed or feel we are on a stop clock. We believe our case isn't just i didn't get into my first choice we have an invested interest in the school with having a child already attending. We would like to think our questions are complimentary to our statement. - putting meat on the bones.

KeepHope,

The thing is, the general comments are surely along the lines of:

• We have admitted 30/60/90;
• Our admission arrangements are lawful;
• No mistake was made that would have cost you your place;
• The decision was not unreasonable.

What evidence are you expecting for those? Obviously if you have unearthed evidence that there HAS been a mistake, or that the arrangements (published) do not meet the legal requirements, then you have presented that in YOUR evidence. However i wouldn't expect 'evidence' that they have admitted 30 etc,over and above the statement that they have done so?

[It may be that the school uses a 'standard' case not to admit for all appeals, whether ICS or not, particularly if it has many appeals each year for different age groups. It may therefore contain statements about balance of prejudice, size of rooms etc that simply doesn't apply in your case. Challenging those is not relevant for an ICS case]

So you have a sibling - is there sibling priority? it is not unlawful not to, just that if they give sibling priority it must be applied correctly. You can't argue that they SHOULD have sibling priority if they don't - it's irrelevant.

You need to be very careful that you don't end up down an irrelevant rabbit hole in questioning the schools case.

What "sweeping general statements" have the school made that you want to question?

ICS is a matter of law, not opinion; the school can't take more than 30 per teacher even if they wanted to. Equally, anything they might say about classroom sizes being small, better quality of education for children, etc is irrelevant - the school themselves haven't decided to cap numbers at 30, that is the law.

Sometimes schools themselves don't really get ICS and will put forward a lot of arguments that are irrelevant and questioning them is also irrelevant.

If you want to PM me I'm happy to take a look at your case and offer some suggestions.