Legal News

Statutory appeals—review or rehearing after Sastry (Ullmer v Secretary of State for Education)

Statutory appeals—review or rehearing after Sastry (Ullmer v Secretary of State for Education)
Published on: 27 May 2021
Published by: LexisPSL
  • Statutory appeals—review or rehearing after Sastry (Ullmer v Secretary of State for Education)
  • What are the practical implications of this case?
  • What was the background?
  • What did the court decide?
  • Case details

Article summary

Local Government analysis: Prohibited teachers have a statutory right of appeal but, unlike appeals brought by other regulated professionals, the appeals are not covered by Practice Direction 52D (ie the direction requiring a rehearing). The CPR provide that, absent a practice direction, appeals shall be limited to a review unless the interests of justice require a rehearing. In appeal brought by teachers, The High Court had previously conducted rehearings, without objection by the Secretary of State; or reviews, without objection by the appellant teacher. In this case, for the first time, the parties took opposing views and the judge reviewed the history of this peculiar appellant jurisdiction and, applying principles enunciated by the Court of Appeal in of Sastry and Okpara v General Medical Council, found that, given the grave nature of the issues at stake, a rehearing was in the interests of justice. For those representing teachers on appeal, it shows a route to securing rehearing rather than a review. Written by Andrew Faux, head of Legal Practice at the Reflective Practice. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents