The Browne Jacobson team of barristers are celebrating their 10th anniversary in December 202 and will be reflecting on their experience at hearings before Courts and Tribunals nationwide to identify key issues and lessons for schools and education providers.
The Browne Jacobson team of barristers are celebrating their 10th anniversary in December 2020. Over the coming editions of BeConnected, the team of qualified barristers will be reflecting on their experience at hearings before Courts and Tribunals nationwide to identify key issues and lessons for schools and education providers. This, the first in the Advocacy in Action series, will consider organisational responsibility in cases of pupil self-harm and suicide.
Pupil A was, seemingly, an ordinary and content 16-year-old pupil. He had underperformed in his GCSEs but had ultimately obtained the grades he needed to study his chosen A-Levels and was making active plans to study at university. The Designated Safeguarding Lead at his school had become aware that Pupil A had experienced low mood in previous years and had self-harmed in the past. The DSL consulted with safeguarding colleagues at the school and was regularly engaging with Pupil A to monitor his well-being. Pupil A was in receipt of medication to manage severe and longstanding headache symptoms but his presentation at school did not give rise to any particular concern for his welfare. Sadly, and unbeknownst to Pupil A’s family, healthcare providers or school, he was struggling to manage his situation and ended his own life with an intentional overdose of his prescribed medication one night in his bedroom.
Suicides amongst young people are, sadly, on the rise, with possible causes including increased incidence of family bereavement, bullying associated with sexuality and gender identity, and an emerging trend for suicide-related internet use. Despite the best efforts of educational settings, it must also be recognised that the series of COVID-19 related lockdowns throughout 2020 may have had a detrimental impact on the mental health and home lives of many vulnerable pupils and may also have reduced schools’ ability to identify and act on safeguarding concerns.
In the case of Pupil A, Browne Jacobson Barristers represented the school in preparation for and at the inquest. The school was granted Properly Interested Person status and was asked to provide witness evidence very late on in proceedings. The school had not been invited to the Pre-Inquest Review Hearings and at the point we were instructed had little information about the scope and purpose of the inquest. The school was keen to assist the Coroner’s inquest process but was, understandably, anxious to understand what the issues and risks might be.
Once instructed, our Senior Associate Barrister, Ian Perkins, was able to engage with the Coroner’s Office to quickly obtain all of the procedural history and relevant evidence. We identified a number of key areas which were likely to be explored at the inquest, including the school’s level of knowledge as to Pupil A’s prior self-harm, whether the school was or should have been aware that Pupil A had suicidal thoughts, whether its monitoring had been sufficient and whether it had erred in not sharing the limited information it had with others. In addition, we identified some other areas such as bullying, exam performance and absence which, whilst not central to the inquest, might be used to generate criticism if not properly considered. We met with the school and its witnesses, who had never previously attended an inquest, to ensure that they knew what to expect and that their evidence would address the relevant issues.
At the inquest itself all of the issues identified were indeed raised, but our preparations ensured that the school was able to demonstrate that there had been no failings or missed opportunities on its part in Pupil A’s case. However, when the actions of Pupil A’s community GPs and treating consultants came under scrutiny from the Coroner, there was an attempt to suggest that Pupil A had expressed school-related anxiety to them which might have explained his poor mental health. Having a barrister at the hearing meant the school was well placed to question the medical professionals and able to demonstrate to the Coroner that this evidence was not in fact consistent with Pupil A’s medical notes and that had Pupil A expressed such concerns this would likely have been recorded.
By attending the inquest for the school, we were able to ensure that other Interested Parties were not able to unfairly aim criticism at the school to deflect from their own potential failings. Crucially, we were also able to ensure that issues which are common to many pupils, such as poor exam performance, occasional absenteeism and low-level disagreements with fellow pupils, were not unfairly construed as major concerns.
This case demonstrates the importance of legal representation in the lead up to and at inquests relating to pupil deaths but also highlighted a number of key lessons that, had Pupil A’s school been less diligent, may have resulted in adverse findings against it. These included the need for:
The sad case of Pupil A also shone a light on the need for all practitioners to remember that mental health and welfare concerns are not always obvious and that young people who may be struggling can also be adept at hiding that fact from those around them. Schools may therefore need to question their existing thresholds for taking action and sharing information for potentially vulnerable pupils.
Browne Jacobson Barristers regularly appear at inquests, Disability Discrimination Act claims, EHC Appeal hearings and Independent Review Panel hearings for exclusions for both schools and local authorities. Our team of barristers also provide specialist advice and advocacy services to the Department for Education and Further Education settings and specialise in disciplinary proceedings. You can instruct one of our barristers either through Browne Jacobson’s Education Team or by contacting our Lead Clerk, Claire Smith, at Barristers@brownejacobson.com or on 0330 045 2323.
Barrister (Senior Associate)
ian.perkins@brownejacobson.com
+44 (0)121 237 3957
There’s been little evidence of interventions or financial management reviews this year and it appears the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) has re-focussed on financial delivery. It’s also telling that there were no discernible changes to the reporting of financial irregularities in the Academies Trust Handbook 2022.
The Children’s Commissioner, Rachel De Souza, has recently published a report “Beyond the labels: a SEND system which works for every child, every time”, which she intends to sit alongside the DfE’s SEND Review (2019) and SEND Green Paper (2022) and which she hopes will put children’s voices at the heart of the government’s review of SEND system.
As well as providing day-to-day support to help you focus on managing your settings, we also provide training and professional development on a range of topics to keep you and your staff up-to-date.
There’s greater opportunity than ever for parents, carers and guardians to voice any concerns they have relating to their child’s education and for their concerns to be heard and to be taken seriously. While most staff in schools and academies are conscious of their legal duties relating to complaints management, many are struggling to cope with such a significant increase in the volume of complaints they must manage.
We’re pleased to collaborate with Lloyds Bank, who recently asked us and audit and risk specialists Crowe UK to offer guidance that academy trusts would find helpful when considering setting up a trading subsidiary.
The DfE has published new guidance and opened the application process for window two of the Trust Capacity Fund (TCaF) for 2022/2023, with a fund of £86m in trust capacity funding focused particularly on education investment areas.
The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse was established in March 2015. We now have its report. As you would expect with such a broad scope, the report is long and makes a number of far-reaching recommendations. In this article, Dai Durbridge highlights seven of the 20 recommendations, sets out how they could impact on schools and suggests what steps to take now.
Browne Jacobson’s education team has been named as winner of the ‘Legal Advisors to Education Institutions’ category at the Education Investor Awards 2022 for a record sixth time.
Since the new Suspensions and Exclusions Statutory Guidance was published, we have received a lot of questions about the use of managed moves. For the first time, the Statutory Guidance does explain what a managed move is, but in relatively broad terms and does not cover the mechanics of how a managed move should operate.
Over 3000 young people from across the UK and Ireland took part in a virtual legal careers insight event, aimed at making the legal profession more diverse.
Holly Quirk, an associate barrister in Browne Jacobson’s Manchester office, was awarded the Legal Professional of the Year Award at this year’s Manchester Young Talent Awards.
The risk of assault against staff is, sadly, something that all schools need to consider carefully. Here one legal expert explains what they can do to protect staff and ensure they fulfil their duty of care.
Two directors of a construction company were fined after failing to ensure the safe removal of asbestos from a plot of land. On 14 and 15 November 2021, Directors Anthony Sumner and Neil Brown, of Waterbarn Limited were involved in the uncontrolled removal of asbestos material from a plot of land in Grasscroft, Oldham.
An engineering company in Tyne and Wear was fined £20,000 after a worker fractured his pelvis and suffered internal injuries after falling through a petrol station forecourt canopy, whilst he was replacing the guttering.
Browne Jacobson’s education team has again been confirmed as a national powerhouse after securing five Tier 1 rankings relating to Education in the latest edition of Legal 500 and maintaining a Band 1 UK-wide ranking for Education in Chambers & Partners UK 2023.
Created at the end of the Brexit transition period, Retained EU Law is a category of domestic law that consists of EU-derived legislation retained in our domestic legal framework by the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. This was never intended to be a permanent arrangement as parliament promised to deal with retained EU law through the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill (the “Bill”).
In this article we set out the criteria, expectations and support schools should consider if notified they fall within this new category.
