§ Jonathan ShawTo ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many times the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunals panel have reviewed a decision under part(a) C and (b) D of the Special Educational Needs Tribunal (Amendment) Regulations 2002. [162114]
632W
§ Margaret Hodge[holding answer 17 March 2004]: Under regulation 37 of the Special Educational Needs Tribunal regulations 2001 parties may ask SENDIST to review a decision on the grounds that:
- (a) its decision was wrongly made as a result of an error on the part of the tribunal staff;
- (b) a party, who was entitled to be heard at the hearing but failed to appear or to be represented, had good and sufficient reason for failing to appear;
- (c) there was an obvious error in the decision; or
- (d) the interests of justice require.
The Tribunal does not hold comprehensive statistics on the grounds for review hearings. However, it has identified four cases since September 2002 in which panels have reviewed decisions because they might have included obvious errors. Over the same period panels have reviewed five decisions because the interests of justice appeared to require it.