Special educational needs and disabilities (SEND)

The Children and Families Act 2014 (CFA 2014) came into force on 1 September 2014, replacing the Education Act 1996 (EA 1996), under which children received provision through statements of special educational need (SEN). CFA 2014 required statements to be replaced in England with Education, Health and Care (EHC) plans. In Wales, Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Act 2018 (ALNET(W)A 2018) and is now largely in force together with a new Additional Learning Needs Code, which will abolish statements and learning disability assessments (LDA) replacing them with individual development plans (IDP). There will be a transitional implementation over a number of years.

CFA 2014 (England)

Under CFA 2014, a child or young person has special educational needs if they have a learning difficulty or disability that calls for special educational provisions to be made for them. Special educational provisions are additional or different from that which would normally be provided for children or young people of the same age. This extends the definition under the EA 1996 to young people as well as children and also includes ...

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Local Government News

Local Government weekly highlights—26 June 2025

This week's edition of Local Government weekly highlights includes: case analysis of Millbrook Healthcare Ltd v Devon CC, in which the court found that damages are an adequate remedy in the procurement dispute despite a not sufficiently serious breach; Birmingham CC and Wolverhampton CC v Persons Unknown, in which the court found compelling justification to continue the injunctions to prevent dangerous car-cruising against persons unknown; R (Ladybill) v Sheffield magistrates’ court & Rotherham MBC, in which the High Court quashed a decision refusing a recusal application; R (AY) v Vale of Glamorgan CBC, in which the court found that there is no right to a solicitor when individual development plans are reviewed; R (Boswell) v SSESNZ, in which greenhouse gas emissions are under scrutiny in a development consent order decision and Ross v SSHCLG and Renewable Energy Systems Ltd, in which the court confirmed that overplanting in solar schemes may be justified beyond panel degradation. Case reports include R (Trinity College (CSP) Ltd) v SSHCLG, in which the court allowed applications for possession orders and final injunctions against persons unknown in relation to disruptive protests conducted by the ‘Cambridge for Palestine’ group; Cetin v Epping FDC, in which the Upper Tribunal clarified that an agent engaged on a ‘let only’ basis with no further management responsibilities does not qualify as ‘person managing’ an HMO under HA 2004; Mitterhuber v Hernandez, in which the court allowed an appeal against a rent repayment order as the FTT was found to have erred in determining the occupancy nature of the property required for the HA 2004 offences; R (AAM) v Bromley LBC, in which the court held that the LA erred in law by taking into account the claimant’s accommodation provided under IAA 1999, s 95 when determining whether exceptional circumstances existed under ChA 1989, s 24 and Norfolk CC v CA, in which the court addressed an application seeking to vary a Transparency Order and found that competing human rights had to be balanced, ultimately favouring the right to freedom of expression. It includes further updates on public procurement, Governance, Education, Social housing, Children’s social care, Social care, Local government finance and Environmental law and climate change.

View Local Government by content type :

Popular documents