HL Deb 17 July 1990 vol 521 cc851-2WA
Lord Denning

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Following the Answer of Baroness Blatch on 5th July (HL Deb, col. 2334), whether sub-paragraph (a) of Section 112 of the Education Reform Act 1988 was expressly inserted separately from sub-paragraph (b) so as to enable the Secretary of State to make an order in connection with voluntary schools or grant maintained schools for the benefit of the whole diocese and places elsewhere instead of being related as previously and still related under sub-paragraph (b) to the locality formerly served by the voluntary school.

Baroness Blatch

Section 2(4) of the Education Act 1973 in the form in which it existed prior to its amendment by Section 112(3) of the Education Reform Act 1988 did not limit the application of the endowments of the voluntary school, the premises of which had gone out of use, to the benefit of other voluntary schools in the locality formerly served by that voluntary school. Section 2(4) as it then stood allowed the endowments to be used for the benefit of any voluntary school. It follows therefore that the amendments to Section 2(4) in Section 112(3) of the Education Reform Act were intended solely to extend the Secretary of State's powers to grant-maintained schools and not to change the effect of that provision in other respects.

Lord Denning

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Following the Answer of the Baroness Blatch on 4th July (HL Deb, col. 2254), whether the courts are precluded from making any such pronouncements by reason of Section 47 of the Endowed Schools Act 1869 which says that "the validity of such scheme and order shall not be questioned in any legal proceedings whatever"; and whether the only place, therefore, in which the validity can be questioned is in Parliament, where the Secretary of State is an interested party.

Baroness Blatch

Whether Section 47 of the Endowed Schools Act 1869 does what it purports to do and prevents the courts from making pronouncements on the validity of schemes made under the Endowed Schools Acts is open to legal argument. I think that the noble and learned Lord leans to the view that it does not in fact achieve its stated purpose. It would be for the court to which a question concerning the validity of a particular scheme was referred to decide whether, Section 47 notwithstanding, it had jurisdiction to hear the case. Many of the schemes under the Endowed Schools Acts were made over 30 years ago and persons have, during that period, acted on the basis that they were valid. A determination that such schemes were invalidly made, if indeed they were, would be retrospective in effect and as such a matter for the courts and not for Parliament.