Autism’s Got Talent is celebrating 15 years 💜✨ Were you part of the journey? Send us your favourite memory, message, or photo from over the years.
Congratulations to our 2026 Hero Award Winners We had a wonderful night celebrating our Heroes of 2026. Thank you to all of the charity's volunteers and our sponsors for this year's awards; it would not have been possible without you. Our sponsors for 2026: SEND Tutoring, TALEM, Eleventhhour Group, NUPFC, Resilient Business Systems, OptiKinectics, UK Pet Food, Training2Care, Harley Street Skin Clinic and Irwin Mitchell. Special thanks to Nanaa Akua, Bradley Riches, PPAS and Mr. Kieron Lee.
Latest News Catch the latest AKO news, charity updates, event announcements, community stories and campaign highlights.
Support & Resources Explore guidance, information and helpful resources.

C & C v The Governing Body of a School [2019] AACR 10

C & C v The Governing Body of a School [2019] AACR 10 Listen to an audio version of this post by clicking here:https://audiomack.com/sean-3082/song/c-and-c-v-gov-body-of-a-school…

Pexels Katrin Bolovtsova 6077326 Scaled 1 1024x683

pexels-katrin-bolovtsova-6077326

C & C v The Governing Body of a School [2019] AACR 10

Listen to an audio version of this post by clicking here:
https://audiomack.com/sean-3082/song/c-and-c-v-gov-body-of-a-school

L, an autistic 11-year-old pupil, was excluded for a day and a half after incidents of physically challenging behaviour towards staff and other pupils.

Parents’ case:
They argued that the exclusion constituted disability discrimination under the Equality Act 2010, on the basis that L’s challenging conduct directly stemmed from his autism and that the school had failed to make reasonable adjustments.

School & Secretary of State’s response:
They relied on regulation 4(1)(c) of the Equality Act 2010 (Disability) Regulations 2010, which excludes from protection any “tendency to physical or sexual abuse” from being classed as a disability.

The First-tier Tribunal upheld the regulation and dismissed the parents’ claim.

Upper Tribunal decision:


Judge Rowley found that, within the educational context, regulation 4(1)(c) contravenes Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights when read alongside the right to education. By stripping disabled children—whose conditions may manifest in physically challenging behaviour—of the Equality Act’s protections, the regulation was unjustifiably discriminatory. Consequently, regulation 4(1)(c) was disapplied, L was recognised as “disabled” under the statutory definition, and his discrimination claim was permitted to proceed.

Suggested Key takeaways:


1.   Disabled pupils retain their rights under the Equality Act even when challenging behaviour forms part of their disability.
2.   Parents may challenge exclusions and insist on evidence of the support and reasonable adjustments provided.
3.   Schools must demonstrate that any exclusion is a proportionate response, revise their policies accordingly and ensure staff receive appropriate training; they can no longer invoke a blanket exclusion rule.

This is a summary of the judgement, which can be found here:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5f846599d3bf7f6b99980875/_2019__AACR_10ws.pdf


It is provided for informational purposes only. Anyone intending to rely on this decision is strongly advised to seek appropriate legal advice.

Sean Kennedy – 1 July 2025

Related posts

View all posts
Scroll to Top