Jake Rylatt

Viewing: Education Law for Jake Rylatt

Jake is the Joint Head of the Education Law Team at No5 Barristers’ Chambers (with Russell Holland). He has developed a broad practice within the field of Education Law, advising on and appearing in a range of types of case including:
• Education, Health and Care Plan (“EHCP”) appeals;
• Discrimination claims in respect of disability and other protected characteristics;
• School admissions appeals;
• School transport appeals;
• School exclusion procedures;
• Judicial review claims in respect of educational provision, such as enforcement of EHCPs and “alternative provision”;
• Civil claims against educational institutions and regulators, including those under the Data Protection Act 2018 or 1998, the Human Rights Act 1998, and for negligence and/or breach of statutory duty;
• Criminal liability for non-attendance at school;
• Complaints procedures, including those to the Secretary of State for Education/Education and Skills Funding Agency;
• Safeguarding, including Disclosure and Barring Service (“DBS”) checks; and
• Exam appeals
Beyond Education Law, Jake continues to develop a broad public law practice which includes areas of law such as such mental capacity and mental health, community care, prison law and immigration law. Jake is increasingly instructed to advise on, and appear in, cases involving an overlap between Education Law and other areas of public law.
Education, Health and Care Plan Appeals
Jake has a wealth of experience advising and acting in appeal proceedings before the First-tier Tribunal in relation to EHCPs, including those appeals under the “National Trial” scheme wherein the First-tier Tribunal may make recommendations on health and social care needs and provision. Jake has secured negotiated solutions to appeals, subsequently approved by the First-tier Tribunal, as well as successfully argued for the recognition of specific needs and the inclusion of contested provision and placements within an EHCP.
Jake’s experience includes appeals against the full breadth of local authority decision-making in respect of EHCPs, including refusals to issue an EHCP, disputes as to the content of such plans, and attempts to cease to maintain an EHCP. Such experience has included appeals where there have been parallel proceedings in the Court of Protection or the Administrative Court, and multiple appeals where packages of education, health and social care provision have cost upwards of £100,000 per annum. Examples include:
TH v A Local Authority – presently instructed on behalf of a parent in proceedings before the Upper Tribunal concerning the duties of the First-tier Tribunal in respect of “school refusers”.
EF (by her alternative person, PF) v A Local Authority – instructed on behalf of a local authority in respect of a ‘National Trial’ EHCP appeal implicating issues such as the need for a waking day curriculum, the development of choate proposals, and the respective roles of the Court of Protection and the First-tier Tribunal.
LW v A Local Authority – instructed on behalf of a local authority in respect of a ‘National Trial’ EHCP appeal, concerning issues such as the role of ‘on-site’ multi-disciplinary teams, procedural requirements for the naming of witnesses in National Trial appeals, and the management of sexualised behaviours in young persons.
VL v A Local Authority – instructed on behalf of a parent in a Section B, F and I appeal, securing various amendments to the EHCP including the naming of an independent special school in Section I.
CF v A Local Authority – instructed on behalf of a local authority in a ‘National Trial’ appeal and successfully-defended parallel proceedings within the Administrative Court.
US v A Local Authority – instructed on behalf of a young person to attend a preliminary hearing in a ‘duty to issue’ appeal at which a local authority sought to argue, on the basis of the young person’s residence, that they were no longer the local authority responsible for issuing an EHCP.
AB v A Local Authority – instructed on behalf of a parent in a ‘National Trial’ EHCP appeal, successfully arguing for the inclusion of an independent special school in Section I despite an asserted c.£75,000 per annum difference in costs.
SK v A Local Authority – instructed on behalf of a local authority in a ‘National Trial’ EHCP appeal in which parents sought a 52-week programme of Applied Behaviour Analysis-based education provided otherwise at school, with wraparound health and social care provision, which could have cost over £200,000 per annum.
Jake is also more frequently being instructed to advise parents as part of the Annual Review process in respect of EHCPs, including in respect of both procedure and substantive amendments to the EHCP. His advice has contributed to negotiated solutions which have avoided the need to bring an appeal, including in respect of issues such as Education Otherwise than at School (“EOTAS”) and both health and social care provision.
Discrimination Claims
Jake has advised and acted in a number of disability discrimination claims before the First-Tier Tribunal, addressing the full breadth of recognised forms of discrimination under the Equality Act 2010, in addition to education-related discrimination claims in the County Court concerning other protected characteristics such as race. Such claims have arisen from a range of factual circumstances such as the imposition of permanent and fixed-term exclusions, responses to bullying, and failures to adjust school practices regarding participation in activities. Examples include:
F v Responsible Body of W School [2020] UKUT 0112 (AAC) – instructed on behalf of a parent in a successful appeal to the Upper Tribunal coprocedure applicable to all disability discrimination claims brought in the First-tier Tribunal.ncerning the “registration”
AW v Responsible Body of A School – instructed on behalf of the responsible body of a school to defend a disability discrimination claim in the First-Tier Tribunal requiring consideration of the proper scope of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction to “make such order as it sees fit”.
MK V Responsible Body of A School – instructed on behalf of a parent in respect of a claim for disability discrimination implicating a range of issues such as “split placements” and the permissibility of “adjourning” decisions on permanent exclusion.
RB v Responsible Body of A School – instructed on behalf of a parent in respect of a claim for disability discrimination concerning the carrying of bladed articles.
Admissions, Exclusions and Transport Appeals/Procedures
Beyond the Courts and Tribunal system, Jake has represented parents and/or acted as an independent legal advisor/clerk at a range of hearings concerning matters of Education Law including:
- Governors’ Disciplinary Meetings (including appeals against permanent exclusions);
- Independent Review Panels (including challenges to permanent exclusions involving disability discrimination contrary to the Equality Act 2010);
- Independent Appeals Panels (for school admissions), at Stage 1 and Stage 2; and
- School Transport Appeal Panels.
Judicial Review
Jake has acted on a number of occasions in judicial review proceedings before the Administrative Court, on behalf of parents as well as local authorities, from pre-action correspondence through to hearings. Such proceedings have covered a range of issues from continuing failures to secure special educational provision in accordance with the terms of an EHCP, failures to provide alternative education, violations of the right to education under the ECHR, and unlawful decision-making in respect of permanent exclusions. Examples include:
HM v A Local Authority – instructed on behalf of a parent to bring judicial review proceedings on behalf of her son against a local authority for a range of failures, namely: i) failure to comply with statutory duties concerning ‘phase transfer’; ii) failure to secure special educational provision as contained in HM’s EHCP; iii) failure to provide suitable alternative education; and iv) failure to provide education contrary to Article 2 of Protocol 1 to the ECHR. Claim was conceded on all grounds by the local authority shortly after issue.
KS v A Local Authority – instructed on behalf of a local authority in judicial review proceedings alleging a failure to secure special educational provision contained in KS’s EHCP. The proceedings were ultimately settled by consent.
CF v A Local Authority and A School – instructed on behalf of a local authority in judicial review proceedings concerning an alleged failure to secure special educational provision. The proceedings were successfully resisted, permission to bring judicial review proceedings being refused on paper and subsequently at an oral renewal hearing.
Re OG – instructed on behalf of a local authority to advice in respect of pre-action correspondence concerning alleged delays in concluding an EHC Needs Assessment.
Re IN – instructed on behalf of a parent to advise on the merits of challenging via judicial review a decision to permanently exclude which had been upheld at a Governors’ Disciplinary Committee meeting and at an Independent Review Panel.
Civil Claims
Jake has advised on, and appeared as counsel in, civil claims arising from the conduct of educational institutions and regulators. Such claims have covered causes of action such as negligence and breaches of statutory duties under the Human Rights Act 1998, the Data Protection Act 2018 or 1998, and the Equality Act 2010. When acting in education-related civil claims, Jake is able to draw on his trial experience acting for Claimants and Defendants in personal injury claims (both fast track and small claims track) and well as broader experience in relation to claims implicating civil liberties.
Further Experience
As indicated above, Jake has also advised on a range of education-related issues including:
• Criminal liability for non-attendance at school, including how fixed penalty notices issued under the Education Act 1996 might be challenged;
• Complaints procedures, both internal to an educational institution and those external (such as to the Secretary of State for Education and/or Education and Skills Funding Agency as relevant);
• Safeguarding, including procedures for raising concerns with local authorities and conducting Disclosure and Barring Service (“DBS”) checks in respect of prospective staff members; and
• Exam appeals, including appeals arising out of the Covid-19-related adjustments to exam processes.
Previous Experience
Before entering practice, as part of the Legal Tools for Peace-Making Project, based at the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law (University of Cambridge), Jake contributed to the development of the award-winning Language of Peace research tool and drafted case studies on key issues arising in peace negotiations. Jake subsequently used these materials to provide training on international law and peace-making to international organisations, including the United Nations, European Union, and the Organization for American States.
Jake also acted as Research Assistant to Professor Marc Weller, assisting with academic publications and legal advisory work. He assisted Professor Weller in engagements concerning the conflicts and transitions in Syria, Yemen, Myanmar (Burma) and Transnistria (Moldova).
As well as securing debating accolades, Jake has competed extensively in mooting competitions during his academic stages of training. This includes achieving first place in the Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer Mooting Competition (2011), and the runner-up place in the Incorporated Council of Law Reporting National Mooting Competition (2012), where he also achieved the distinction of Joint Best Oralist in the Final Round. He also reached the quarter finals of the Lincoln’s Inn Inter-Provider Mooting Competition (2016) and the Philip C. Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition on two occasions (2012 – 2013, 2013 – 2014). On the latter occasion, his team were also runners up for Best Applicant Memorial and Best Overall Memorials.
Appointments
College Research Associate, Wolfson College, University of Cambridge (2015 – Present)
Visiting Tutor and Examiner in International Law, University of Leeds (2014-2015)
Awards
Lincoln’s Inn: Walter Wigglesworth Pupillage Award (2017)
Lincoln’s Inn: Buchanan Prize (2017)
Lincoln’s Inn: Lord Denning Major Scholarship (2015)
Lincoln’s Inn: Hardwicke Entrance Scholarship (2014)
BPP Law School: Excellence Award Scholarship
University of Cambridge: Philip C. Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition (2013-2014) - UK National Rounds Quarter Finalist; Runners Up for Best Applicant Memorial and Best Overall Memorials (c.25,000 words submission required as part of the mooting commpetition)
University of Leeds: Hughes Extended Essay Prize for Highest Marked LLB Dissertation (2013)
University of Leeds: Hogan Lovells Prize in Commercial Law (2012)
University of Leeds: Sidley Austin LLP Prize in Advanced Legal Research and Law Reform (2012)
University of Leeds: Allen and Overy Debating Competition - Runner Up (2012), Winner (2011)
Memberships
Liberty
Justice
Human Rights Lawyers Association (HRLA)
Administrative Law Bar Association (ALBA)
Young Legal Aid Lawyers (YLAL)
Court of Protection Practitioners’ Association (COPPA)
Criminal Bar Association
Qualifications
BPTC – BPP University, London (2015-2017) – Outstanding – 2nd in Year
LL.M (International) – University of Cambridge (2013-2014)
LL.B Law (Hons) – University of Leeds (2010-2013) – First Class – 1st in Year
Jake has published widely in the fields of public law, human rights law, international law, and EU law, and his work has been cited by national and international bodies such as the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution, the EU Parliament, and a dispute settlement panel of the World Trade Organization. It has also been featured in multiple House of Commons briefing papers, written by the House of Commons Library for Members of Parliament. Examples of published works include:
Books:
The Oxford Handbook of the Use of Force in International Law (Oxford University Press, 2015) (as Assistant Editor).
Articles and Book Chapters:
‘Attribution of Conduct in the Context of UN-Authorised International Military Operations: Serdar Mohammed before the Courts of England and Wales’ (2017) 55(1) Military Law and the Law of War Review 75
‘Delegated Legislation, Brexit, and the Courts’ (2017) 22(3) Judicial Review 320 (with Dr Joe Tomlinson)
‘Counterclaims in International Law’ in La Solucion de Controversias en Derecho Internacional y Temas Vinculados: Liber Amicorum for Alejandro Turyn (Eudoba: Buenos Aires, 2017) (with Dr Michael Waibel, Cambridge)
‘Something New in Substantive Review: Keyu v Secretary of State for the Home Department’ (2016) 21(3) Judicial Review 204 (with Mr Joe Tomlinson).
‘Immigration and Refugee Law (2014-2015 Legal Year)’ (2015) 6 UK Supreme Court Yearbook 406.
‘Immigration Law (2013-2014 Legal Year)’ (2015) 5 UK Supreme Court Yearbook 338.
‘An Evaluation of the US Policy of Targeted Killing under International Law: The Case of Anwar Al-Aulaqi (Part II)’ (2014) 44(2) California Western International Law Journal 1.
‘An Evaluation of the US Policy of Targeted Killing under International Law: The Case of Anwar Al-Aulaqi (Part I)’ (2013) 44(1) California Western International Law Journal 39.
Online Publications:
‘Provisional Measures and the Authority of the International Court of Justice: Sovereignty vs. Efficiency’ (2013) 1(1) Leeds Journal of Law and Criminology 45.
Written Evidence: Delegated Powers in the ‘Great Repeal Bill’ Inquiry’ (24 February 2017) House of Commons Procedure Committee (with Mr Joe Tomlinson).
‘Identifying the Language of Peace: Developing the Practical and Theoretical Framework of Peace-Making’ (4 January 2017) EJIL: Talk! (with Professor Marc Weller, Dr Tiina Pajuste, Dr Mark Retter and Ms Andrea Varga).
‘And Then There Were Eleven: Some Context on the Supreme Court Sitting En Banc in the Article 50 Case’ (10 November 2016) UK Constitutional Law Association Blog (with Mr Joseph Tomlinson and Dr Duncan Fairgrieve).
‘The Irrevocability of an Article 50 Notification: Lex Specialis and the Irrelevance of the Purported Customary Right to Unilaterally Revoke’ (27 July 2016) UK Constitutional Law Association Blog.
‘Neuberger’s Novelties: Keyu and the Substantive Review Debate’ (17 February 2016) UK Constitutional Law Association Blog (with Mr Joseph Tomlinson).
‘The Use of Force against ISIL in Libya and the Sounds of Silence’ (6 January 2016) EJIL: Talk!.

Latest News & Publications

Jake Rylatt provides an update regarding the Government U-turn on 17th August, how it affects the 2020 A-level and GCSE results and challenging grades & offers for affected students....

Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020
This year there will be confusion and concern for students and staff alike...

Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020
Where next when considering capacity concerning sexual relations?...

Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020