Admissions panel members - please help!

[SE13Mummy]

This is a bit of a specialist query but I'm hoping you will be able to help...

Locally, a number of secondary schools have had their admissions policies challenged via the Schools Adjudicator, the outcome of which is a directive to change the policies in order that they comply with the School Admissions Code. The challenge had to be applied to the 2018/19 policies even though the basis for that challenge came to light when preparing an appeal for a 2017/18 application. The 2017/18 policies were the same as the 2018/19 ones.

My first question is this: as the admissions policies have been found to be unlawful, what is the process by which an appeal panel's decision not to admit a child can be appealed? The admissions appeal was held approximately one month before the Adjudicator's decision was shared.

Also, in a different local borough, I believe
a primary school (faith school) has incorrectly applied its own admissions policy thus denying a child a place. In addition, there are a number of ambiguous/vague clauses in the policy which I believe do not meet the requirements of the Schools Admission Code. Disappointingly, the parents' appeal was not upheld. The date has passed for referrals to the Schools Adjudicator for 2018/19 admissions policies (and it's long gone for 2017/18 entry!) so I'm not sure which body would look into this - it seems unfair that a possibly unlawful admissions policy has been used to deny a child a 2017/18 place.

My second question is: how can an admissions panel's decision be appealed, not on the basis of ICS but because the admissions policy has not been correctly applied and/or may be unlawful?

The usual to challenge an appeal decision is through the LGO (maintained schools) or EFA (other types of school), though they will not review the decision itself, just whether procedures were correctly followed, and if not, whether that put the appellant at a disadvantage. If they consider there was a procedural error, then they can order a new appeal.

I don't think that's applicable here, in either case. You could argue that in both cases the "wrong" decision was made - the panels didn't observe that the admissions code was being broken - but that's not a procedural error. They looked at the evidence and decided in their view that the code has not been broken.

The other route is through judicial review. This can however end up being extremely costly (£20k plus) if you lose.

As the appeals that you are talking about took place before the adjudication came out, the appeal panel made a decision based on the evidence and admission policy at that time. I would have thought it unlikely that anybody such as the LGO/ ESFA is going to be interested in investigating a case under these parameters.
Clearly appeal cases that are subsequent to the adjudication are slightly different and the admission authority knows that the policy is faulty but the Schools Adjudicator has only ordered the policy to be reviewed from 2018/19 so again it think it would be a difficult case to argue.

Thank you Admission. Would it make any difference if the original appeals in both cases had challenged the lawfulness of the admissions policies? In the case of the secondary schools, the panel was aware that the school had been referred to the Adjudicator on the grounds of its admissions policy being unlawful.

The appeal panel is required to look at whether the admission arrangements comply with the Admissions Code and relevant law. If they have not done so that is a problem which could, in theory at least, result in a fresh hearing. However, if they decided that the admission arrangements did comply that decision stands even though the Schools Adjudicator has now decided that they did not.

Whether or not the parents challenged the lawfulness of the admission policies in the appeals is irrelevant in terms of what happens now.

Unless the LGO/ESFA is willing to step in (which I think is unlikely) the only way for the parents to challenge the appeal decision is via judicial review. As PatriciaHolm says, that can be very costly.

This has happened for our LA policy though the Schools Adjudicator was clear that the applications had to stand but the waiting lists had to be ranked to the correct criteria. Appeals panels have taken into account where the child would have been ranked if the policy had been correct but have not ruled in the parents favour in most cases.
I would check to see if the ruling gave specific directions that are similar.