Court of Appeal orders urgent hearing in important case on child criminal exploitation and school exclusions

Tuesday 4 February 2025

The Appellant is represented by Nicola Braganza KC, Ollie Persey and Alex Temple of Garden Court Chambers. They are assisted by Maya Thomas Davis (first six pupil). In the High Court, the Appellant was also represented by Harry Harris. They are instructed by Kate Ward and Karen May at Bindmans LLP assisted by Tatyana Koleva.

Black Equity Organisation is represented by Duran Seddon KC and Nadia O’Mara of Garden Court Chambers, instructed by the pro bono team at Freshfields.

See coverage in Local Government Lawyer.

Share This Page

Email This Page

"*" indicates required fields

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The Court of Appeal has ordered a rolled-up hearing in the case of RWU v A Governing Body of an Academy [2024] EWHC 2828 recognising that the case raises “urgent” and “important” issues, with Black Equity Organisation (‘BEO’) granted permission to intervene “in view of the wider public interest”. It will be the first time that the Court of Appeal has considered the connection between Child Criminal Exploitation (‘CCE’) and school exclusions. The appeal will be heard on 6 February 2025.

The Appellant is a Black, 15-year-old child from inner city London. He has a positive Reasonable Grounds (‘RG’) decision from the National Referral Mechanism (“NRM”), meaning he is recognised as a potential victim of CCE due to being involved in County Lines drugs trafficking. The Appellant challenges the decision of the governing body of his school to uphold his permanent exclusion.

The situation could not be more serious: the Appellant has been trafficked and it is his case that there were clear indicators of CCE before his exclusion. After losing the protective environment of his school the situation became much worse. The Appellant has been repeatedly injured. The police are gravely concerned for his wellbeing and are investigating him as a victim of modern slavery.

The Appellant’s exclusion went through a lengthy process of being considered by the school’s governors and an Independent Review Panel (‘IRP’). The IRP quashed the exclusion and required the governors to reconsider it. However, on reconsideration they again upheld the exclusion.

The Appellant brought judicial review proceedings against the governors’ decision. The Appellant argued, in part, that the school had a duty to protect him from exploitation under Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’), which guarantees freedom from slavery and forced labour. Being in school is widely regarded as a protective factor for young people that keeps them safe from exploitation. Exclusion, however, immediately makes a child more vulnerable to exploitation. The Appellant therefore argued that considering the series of commonly acknowledged indicators of CCE displayed by the Appellant, which were known to the school, the Respondent had a duty not to exclude him as this would further his exploitation.

The High Court concluded that Article 4 ECHR was not engaged other than by “an impermissible exercise of hindsight” and therefore there was no duty on the school to protect the Appellant from further exploitation. The High Court’s order dismissing the claim will be considered at a full hearing on 6 February 2025.

The case raises issues of significant wider public interest as it is the first case to consider the application of the Article 4 ECHR protection duty in the context of school exclusions. The Appellant’s application for permission was supported by witness evidence, with evidence from BEO and Coram Children’s Legal Centre that set out the wider systemic issues relating to CCE and school exclusions. BEO was later granted permission to intervene by way of written submissions.

School exclusions have risen dramatically in recent years, as have the number of children and young people drawn into County Lines and referred into the NRM. A disproportionate number of children and young people in the criminal justice system and in prison were previously excluded from school. Children and young people from Black Caribbean communities, Gypsy, Roma and Traveller backgrounds and those with special educational needs are overrepresented in exclusion statistics and at increased risk of CCE.

The Appellant and his mother are supported by BLAM UK’s Aqsa Suleman, who also acted as a representative in the IRP process. BLAM UK runs the School Exclusion Appeal Services for Black British Students. BLAM UK, solicitors and counsel are all part of the School Inclusion Project (SIP). SIP brings together lawyers, advisers and campaigners with expertise in the field of school exclusions and related issues, to address systemic discrimination in the education system. SIP has been shortlisted for this year’s The Halsbury Award for Rule of Law at the LexisNexis Legal Awards.

Related Areas of Law

We are top ranked by independent legal directories and consistently win awards.

+ View more awards