R (CM) v Independent Review Panel of PQR Academy Trust [2025] EWHC 1414 (Admin) – High Court Judgment, 9 June 2025

R (CM) v Independent Review Panel of PQR Academy Trust [2025] EWHC 1414 (Admin) – High Court Judgment, 9 June 2025

What Is Article 4 ECHR?

Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights prohibits slavery and forced or compulsory labour. It also imposes positive obligations on public authorities to protect individuals from being trafficked or exploited. In the context of schools, it means that if a pupil faces a real and immediate risk of being trafficked or subjected to forced labour, their educational institution must take appropriate steps to safeguard them.

Summary of the Case

Background:
CM, a 14-year-old pupil with special educational needs and a history of trauma, was permanently excluded from PQR Academy after numerous serious behavioural incidents. Her grandmother, CY, brought a judicial review when the Independent Review Panel (IRP) upheld that exclusion.

Claimant’s Arguments:

• The permanent exclusion breached Article 4 ECHR because CM was at risk of child criminal exploitation (county lines drug trafficking).
• The IRP failed to consider this human-rights dimension when reviewing the exclusion.

Defendant’s Arguments:

• There was no credible or immediate risk of CM being trafficked under Article 4.
• The Academy had provided extensive support (one-to-one aides, assessments, managed moves) and exclusion was a lawful last resort to protect other pupils and staff.

Judge’s Decision

• No Article 4 Obligation Arising: The court found no concrete evidence that CM faced a real and immediate risk of trafficking or forced labour at any material time.
• Lawful Exclusion: Permanent exclusion was upheld as proportionate and in accordance with statutory guidance, given the severity and persistence of CM’s conduct.
• IRP’s Conduct: Although the IRP did not explicitly address Article 4 submissions, this was immaterial because Article 4 did not apply on the facts.

Significance for Disabled Children and Exclusions

This case confirms that:

1. Human-Rights Threshold: Schools need only consider Article 4 ECHR where there is clear evidence of a real and immediate risk of trafficking or forced labour.
2. Balancing Duties: The welfare of the excluded child must be weighed against the safety and learning environment of others.
3. Last Resort Exclusion: Even highly vulnerable disabled pupils may lawfully be excluded if all reasonable support measures have been exhausted and exclusion is necessary to protect the wider school community.

This judgment underscores that, absent firm evidence of trafficking risk, Article 4 will not prevent a properly justified permanent exclusion.

This is a summary of the decision, which can be found HERE

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

Sean Kennedy

22 June 2025