|[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]|
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions >> H, R (on the application of) v Hertfordshire County Council  EWCA Civ 146 (6 February 2002)
Cite as:  EWCA Civ 146
[New search] [Context] [View without highlighting] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
(Mr Justice Turner)
Wednesday, 6th February 2002
B e f o r e :
LORD JUSTICE SEDLEY
|THE QUEEN ON THE APPLICATION OF H|
|- v -|
|HERTFORDSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL|
Smith Bernal Reporting Limited, 190 Fleet Street,
London EC4A 2AG
Tel: 0171 421 4040
Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
MR TIMOTHY BRENNAN QC (Instructed by Hertfordshire County Council, County Secretary, County Hall,
Hertford SG13 8DE) appeared on behalf of the Respondent.
Crown Copyright ©
Wednesday, 6th February 2002
"1.We believe the events described by [the boy] occurred.
2.We therefore believe that [the applicant] may pose a risk to children for whom he has a responsibility and who are in his charge.
3.We recommend that this belief is passed to the Director of Education on the assumption that this view will be conveyed to the school governing body."
"On balance, having considered all of this information, it was agreed by the panel unanimously, that the belief that [the applicant] is a suspected abuser and therefore a risk to children namely, the vulnerable young boys at Boxmore School, should be upheld."
(1) the composition and impartiality of the members of both the disciplinary panel (which had sat) and the appeal panel (which was yet to sit);
(2) the presence of a legal adviser, in addition to a local authority adviser, to the disciplinary panel;
(3) the local authority's failure to produce certain documents;
(4) the rationality of the belief formed by the local authority;
(5) the legality of the local authority's procedure in the light of section 47 of the Children Act 1989; and
(6)its effect on the disciplinary process.
(1) a failure to give reasons;
(2) a finding that there had been a material breach of a protocol which the governors were said never to have adopted; and
(3) a lack of independence and impartiality in the composition of the Appeal Tribunal.
(1) the Beliefs decision of 7th December 2000 was vitiated by the failure to give the applicant an opportunity to contest the ground for it and by violating the presumption of innocence;
(2) the appeal panel was obliged, both at common law and by Article 6, to give reasons;
(3) the criticism of the composition of the appeal panel was legitimately reserved to this court, and it is a matter of concern to the court and a justiciable matter that the prosecutor, who was the Director of Education, had selected two members, while both advisers were employees of Hertfordshire County Council.
"Estimated length of hearing: six hours."
"The oral hearing of applications for permission to appeal will be of limited duration."