abraham wrote:I know all the very experienced advisors on here generally caution against raising issues with 'the system' itself
Well spotted! I would just add:
unless there has also been maladministration.
I try to define maladministration (in the context of appeals) here:
https://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/appeals/general#a57" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
An appeal panel does have a duty to consider the admission arrangements - but, unless there has been maladministration in a particular case, all it can do is report to the chair of governors and the LA any failure to apply the admission arrangements correctly and impartially.
Are you allowed to share information about a statement made by the admissions authority during the group hearing regarding the 2019 paper?
Thank you to Janita for the tactful way in which this issue was raised.
My answer is that I wouldn't want the Appeals forum to get bogged down in the details of the underlying issue, but I see no objection to discussing procedure (i.e. how the matter should be dealt with at appeal).
If I've understood correctly from various sources, when parents started to challenge the school representative, the chair intervened, dismissed the statement, said it was not for the school to be interrogated, and that complaints/requests/questions should be raised with CSSE, not the school.
If this is what happened, then in my view the chair was wrong because the Appeals Code states with regard to the two stage process:
First stage – examining the decision to refuse admission
3.2 The panel must consider the following matters in relation to each child that is the
subject of an appeal:
a) whether the admission arrangements (including the area’s co-ordinated
admission arrangements) complied with the mandatory requirements of the
School Admissions Code and Part 3 of the School Standards and Framework
Act 1998; and
b) whether the admission arrangements were correctly and impartially applied in
the case in question.
I think it was the responsibility of the panel to consider the admission arrangements, and the responsibility of the school representative to answer questions.
If the school representative needed to get advice, he could have asked for an adjournment.
Whether any of this would have shown maladministration (i.e. that a particular child had been deprived of a place to which he/she would otherwise have been entitled) is another matter.
abraham wrote:if one of the admissions authorities in Essex (any one of the 10 consortium schools) were to raise something in their statement to their own IAP that could also potentially impact on appeals to other schools in the consortium, would they have a duty to disclose it to the other schools/appellants?
I don't think there's any legal duty - but if awareness of a potential issue were to spread, other school representatives would be wise to come to stage one prepared to deal with any questions from concerned appellants.
abraham wrote:is there any way someone who was appealing to another school/s in the consortium could legitimately get their hands on this statement from CRGS?
If I've understood correctly, it was an oral statement, so it depends how detailed the clerk's notes were.
Someone could try making a Freedom of Information request for a copy of the clerk's notes for stage one, but it is quite possible it will meet with resistance.
The previous Appeals Code stated that the clerk’s notes are not covered by the Freedom of Information Act, but left open the possibility of making an SAR (Subject Access Request) under the Data Protection Act. (All this pre-dates General Data Protection Regulation of course.)
An SAR would apply to stage two where there is personal information about the appellant.
The wording in the current (2012) Code has changed to:
2.27 These notes and records of proceedings must be kept securely by the admission authority for a minimum of two years. Such notes and records will, in most cases, be exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the Data Protection Act 1998, but admission authorities receiving requests under those Acts for information or data contained in such notes or records should obtain legal advice.