BREAKING: APPEAL COURT DECISION ON SCHOOLS (Off Topic)

TERM-TIME HOLIDAY DAD LOSES COURT BATTLE
By Sean Coughlan


Thursday 6th April 2017

A father has lost his legal challenge against a fine for taking his daughter on an unauthorised term-time holiday.


The Supreme Court ruled against Jon Platt, who had won earlier legal battles against a £120 fine in a case brought by the Isle of Wight council.

He said the decision, over a trip to Florida, meant the "state was taking the rights away from parents".

Prime Minister Theresa May said it was right for schools to decide the balance between attendance and absences.

"It's right that the individual head teacher has that flexibility to make that decision," she said.

The judges ruled that the interpretation of "regular" attendance, at the centre of this long-running dispute, should be decided by the school.

But Mr Platt said parents would find it "utterly shocking" that they needed the "permission of the state" to decide on school attendance.

"You are not the final arbiter of what's right for your child."

There have been warnings that this could widen the gap in prices during the school holidays

In her judgement, Lady Hale said if parents were able to withdraw children whenever they wanted it would cause unacceptable disruption.

"Unauthorised absences have a disruptive effect, not only on the education of the individual child, but also on the work of other pupils, and of their teachers," she said.

Allowing parents to decide when they wanted to remove their children would be a "slap in the face" to parents who kept the rules, said Lady Hale.

The case has raised questions about the high cost of travel during school holidays and Andrew Shelton from the Cheapflights travel website said that the court ruling's tough line on term-time absences could "widen the price divide between term-time and school holiday even further".

Mr Shelton said that at present there could be a 50% difference in prices.

The ruling, which upheld the appeal by the Isle of Wight council and the Department for Education, means that the case will be returned to the magistrates' court, where Mr Platt says he will continue to plead not guilty.

The Supreme Court found that the penalty notice had been properly issued and that unless there was a reasonable cause for the absence - such as illness - Mr Platt could have expected to face a fine for his daughter's absence from school.

Mr Platt claims the ruling takes rights away from parents

The Isle of Wight council backed the decision as providing "much-needed clarity about what constitutes regular attendance at school".

The ruling rejects Mr Platt's argument that despite missing a week of school for a holiday, his daughter had still regularly attended over the course of the year, with an attendance rate of over 92%.

The judges did not accept this interpretation and said parents would have to comply with the rules set by schools and education authorities.

The row centred on a week's holiday to Disney World two years ago, taken without the head teacher's permission.

Mr Platt was fined £60 which with non-payment was increased to £120 - after which he faced prosecution for failing to ensure his daughter's regular attendance at school.

But he argued that a week's absence in term-time should not be seen in isolation - and should be considered in the context of his daughter's overall attendance.


Truancy prosecutions in England in 2015
Proceeded against: 19,920 (16,430 in 2014)
Found guilty: 14,890 (12,479 in 2014)
Fined: 11,493, average fine £176. (9,214, average fine £172 in 2014)
Immediate custody: 8 (18 in 2014)
Suspended sentence: 111 (103 in 2014)
Community sentence: 553 (488 in 2014)
Conditional discharge: 2,280 (2,371 in 2014)
Absolute discharge: 306 (167 in 2014)
[i]Source: PA[/i]


Magistrates had found in favour of Mr Platt's argument, saying that he had no case to answer.

When this was put to appeal, the High Court agreed that magistrates had been entitled to consider school attendance outside of the term-time absence.

But the Department for Education, which has been trying to reduce truancy, supported the Isle of Wight council in challenging these rulings.

A Department for Education spokeswoman said: "We are pleased the Supreme Court unanimously agreed with our position - that no child should be taken out of school without good reason.

"As before, head teachers have the ability to decide when exceptional circumstances allow for a child to be absent but today's ruling removes the uncertainty for schools and local authorities that was created by the previous judgment.

"The evidence shows every extra day of school missed can affect a pupil's chances of achieving good GCSEs, which has a lasting effect on their life chances."

I kind of agree and I don't.

If education is that important and a day missed can impact so badly why are schools shut down when teachers go on strike?

They should have temps in to carry on teaching the kids it was only a few years ago danescourt school was striking at every opportunity when my children were in there I think it was 4 days of education my children missed out on then.

This is about revenue in my opinion

The point is the travel industry, screw us .
School holidays there is such a price hike and nothing is done about it .
But having said that its been like that for years.
Why don't the government question this , the reason they don't is so many of the MP's of all parties are special advisors of travel firms and airlines etc.

The point is the travel industry, screw us .
School holidays there is such a price hike and nothing is done about it .
But having said that its been like that for years.
Why don't the government question this , the reason they don't is so many of the MP's of all parties are special advisors of travel firms and airlines etc.

100% agree although the travel industry will claim you can't legislate for market forces.

I also agree with the Supreme Court. Whilst understanding the problems caused by the travel industry term time is for schooling. At the end of the day a child can do without a holiday, it can't do without education.

The point is the travel industry, screw us .
School holidays there is such a price hike and nothing is done about it .
But having said that its been like that for years.
Why don't the government question this , the reason they don't is so many of the MP's of all parties are special advisors of travel firms and airlines etc.

100% agree although the travel industry will claim you can't legislate for market forces.

I also agree with the Supreme Court. Whilst understanding the problems caused by the travel industry term time is for schooling. At the end of the day a child can do without a holiday, it can't do without education.

They should allow families to take kids out for 10 days a year whenever for holiday, then it becomes affordable for many who can't go in school holidays. Kids learn just as much at home as in school, it's not all about sitting in room being told this and that. Family time out of the usual places is important. I've been a teacher and as long as kids are helped at home also they will be fine. It's more important that they want to learn. Most kids will miss at least 10 days a year through illness alone. Some parents keep their kids off all the time, these are the people they NEED to crack down on......
I'm going to Florida next october for a family re union 70 th birthdays etc and I'm taking my 2 to Disney for the first time whatever.....they can fine me all they want. My 5 yr old has t missed a day of school yet this year either....

Quote of the day, sums it up brilliantly.
'At the end of the day a child can do without a holiday, it can't do without education.'

What about the number of inset days before and after term time that kids miss school through! (Roughly 10 days) so the poor teachers don't lose holiday time? but parents have to lose their hols to look after kids as no child care?

I had a little think about this and broadly I am against children's education being disrupted, as it has a knock on effect for all concerned (the children, their classmates, teachers, etc.)

However, I have some sympathy with parents who may only have a small window of opportunity to take their children on a special holiday or (maybe) to an important event. Some workers are governed as to when they take their holidays and when both parents are working it can be difficult to line up their annual leave together when everyone is clambering for the comparatively few out of term weeks

What I think is needed here is a little bit of situational awareness (what used to be called common sense) and so long as Head Teachers take each case on an individual basis with full knowledge of the circumstances, then I don't see how the situation cannot be managed locally

However, as always some will have a simple "I'll do what I want just because I want to" attitude, the decision of the Court is probable a sound one to ensure responsibility and continuity

I took my children out every year for 5 days, both children have achieved A level education.....so I see no deterement to education. My daughter broke both arms and had 1 day off school....so how about instead of this blanket ban parents taking more responsibility and understanding if it is appropriate to take children out of school.....

School holidays are a total rip off and if the child missed a few days off in term time then that's not a problem as long as they have a good overall attendance. My 2 go few days outside every year and my son just about to leave school with 15 gcses A*-C grade . Others are leaving with a lot less and never miss a day. It's down to the individual pupil for grades. All the rest of the rubbish is teacher / government number crunching bull

School holidays are a total rip off and if the child missed a few days off in term time then that's not a problem as long as they have a good overall attendance. My 2 go few days outside every year and my son just about to leave school with 15 gcses A*-C grade . Others are leaving with a lot less and never miss a day. It's down to the individual pupil for grades. All the rest of the rubbish is teacher / government number crunching bull

https://www.gov.uk/home-education

makes no sense to me.
you can opt out but cant take your kids on holidays.

Hardly a disruption because the opportunity for parents to take their child out of school has been there for years and years and it rarely happens that much now? Like it's not like loads of people do it, it's a very very small minority.

The point is the travel industry, screw us .
School holidays there is such a price hike and nothing is done about it .
But having said that its been like that for years.
Why don't the government question this , the reason they don't is so many of the MP's of all parties are special advisors of travel firms and airlines etc.

100% agree although the travel industry will claim you can't legislate for market forces.

I also agree with the Supreme Court. Whilst understanding the problems caused by the travel industry term time is for schooling. At the end of the day a child can do without a holiday, it can't do without education.

They should allow families to take kids out for 10 days a year whenever for holiday, then it becomes affordable for many who can't go in school holidays. Kids learn just as much at home as in school, it's not all about sitting in room being told this and that. Family time out of the usual places is important. I've been a teacher and as long as kids are helped at home also they will be fine. It's more important that they want to learn. Most kids will miss at least 10 days a year through illness alone. Some parents keep their kids off all the time, these are the people they NEED to crack down on......
I'm going to Florida next october for a family re union 70 th birthdays etc and I'm taking my 2 to Disney for the first time whatever.....they can fine me all they want. My 5 yr old has t missed a day of school yet this year either....

In Wales you can take 10 days of holidays with the school head' s permission without a penalty.

TERM-TIME HOLIDAY DAD LOSES COURT BATTLE
By Sean Coughlan


Thursday 6th April 2017

A father has lost his legal challenge against a fine for taking his daughter on an unauthorised term-time holiday.


The Supreme Court ruled against Jon Platt, who had won earlier legal battles against a £120 fine in a case brought by the Isle of Wight council.

He said the decision, over a trip to Florida, meant the "state was taking the rights away from parents".

Prime Minister Theresa May said it was right for schools to decide the balance between attendance and absences.

"It's right that the individual head teacher has that flexibility to make that decision," she said.

The judges ruled that the interpretation of "regular" attendance, at the centre of this long-running dispute, should be decided by the school.

But Mr Platt said parents would find it "utterly shocking" that they needed the "permission of the state" to decide on school attendance.

"You are not the final arbiter of what's right for your child."

There have been warnings that this could widen the gap in prices during the school holidays

In her judgement, Lady Hale said if parents were able to withdraw children whenever they wanted it would cause unacceptable disruption.

"Unauthorised absences have a disruptive effect, not only on the education of the individual child, but also on the work of other pupils, and of their teachers," she said.

Allowing parents to decide when they wanted to remove their children would be a "slap in the face" to parents who kept the rules, said Lady Hale.

The case has raised questions about the high cost of travel during school holidays and Andrew Shelton from the Cheapflights travel website said that the court ruling's tough line on term-time absences could "widen the price divide between term-time and school holiday even further".

Mr Shelton said that at present there could be a 50% difference in prices.

The ruling, which upheld the appeal by the Isle of Wight council and the Department for Education, means that the case will be returned to the magistrates' court, where Mr Platt says he will continue to plead not guilty.

The Supreme Court found that the penalty notice had been properly issued and that unless there was a reasonable cause for the absence - such as illness - Mr Platt could have expected to face a fine for his daughter's absence from school.

Mr Platt claims the ruling takes rights away from parents

The Isle of Wight council backed the decision as providing "much-needed clarity about what constitutes regular attendance at school".

The ruling rejects Mr Platt's argument that despite missing a week of school for a holiday, his daughter had still regularly attended over the course of the year, with an attendance rate of over 92%.

The judges did not accept this interpretation and said parents would have to comply with the rules set by schools and education authorities.

The row centred on a week's holiday to Disney World two years ago, taken without the head teacher's permission.

Mr Platt was fined £60 which with non-payment was increased to £120 - after which he faced prosecution for failing to ensure his daughter's regular attendance at school.

But he argued that a week's absence in term-time should not be seen in isolation - and should be considered in the context of his daughter's overall attendance.


Truancy prosecutions in England in 2015
Proceeded against: 19,920 (16,430 in 2014)
Found guilty: 14,890 (12,479 in 2014)
Fined: 11,493, average fine £176. (9,214, average fine £172 in 2014)
Immediate custody: 8 (18 in 2014)
Suspended sentence: 111 (103 in 2014)
Community sentence: 553 (488 in 2014)
Conditional discharge: 2,280 (2,371 in 2014)
Absolute discharge: 306 (167 in 2014)
[i]Source: PA[/i]


Magistrates had found in favour of Mr Platt's argument, saying that he had no case to answer.

When this was put to appeal, the High Court agreed that magistrates had been entitled to consider school attendance outside of the term-time absence.

But the Department for Education, which has been trying to reduce truancy, supported the Isle of Wight council in challenging these rulings.

A Department for Education spokeswoman said: "We are pleased the Supreme Court unanimously agreed with our position - that no child should be taken out of school without good reason.

"As before, head teachers have the ability to decide when exceptional circumstances allow for a child to be absent but today's ruling removes the uncertainty for schools and local authorities that was created by the previous judgment.

"The evidence shows every extra day of school missed can affect a pupil's chances of achieving good GCSEs, which has a lasting effect on their life chances."

Nothing to do with Wales. Children are allowed up to 10 days term-time holidays here if agreed with schools.

Why didn't he just pay the £120.

Why didn't he just pay the £120.

Originally £60 guess he was trying to win on principle that 5 days out of a 100 doesn't constitute frequent absence which was his argument , the Lords took view it did so preventing everyone taking kids out in term time.

Quote of the day, sums it up brilliantly.
'At the end of the day a child can do without a holiday, it can't do without education.'

That (a tad arrogantly) assumes you can learn more in a classroom than you would seeing different parts of the world.

I took my family on holiday to Tenerife a little earlier this year and the difference in price between in season and out of season meant that we could afford a private tour across the island which included travelling across 5 separate micro climates, walking through the caldera of Mt Teidi a dormant volcano and technically the highest point in Spain and also a private hire for a day of a rib dinghy with a pilot/local guide who took us out to see dolphins, whales, and turtles.

Also in the week we were out there my boy (he is 4) was able to learn some rudimentary Spanish (Ola, Adios, Grasias) which more than anything was just about him getting used to the concept of learning another language.

Personally, I think that is a far greater learning experience for him than being stuck in a classroom for a week.

For the record mind - my wife completely disagrees and it is next year that he starts school proper next year rather than nursery (he'll be one of the eldest in the year so will be just about to turn 5 when he starts) so we probably won't up taking him out of term time - but I really don't think it is a major crime personally.

Why didn't he just pay the £120.

I'll be honest that was my first thought as well.

We have the most examined and stressed kids in the world ! Why ? We measure intelligence with ludicrous bits of meaningless paper which in reality amount to shit. This is laughable, truly laughable crap. Some jerkoff telling us that missing a week is akin to career suicide, please spare me. The state should have no rights in this area, private schools have no such rulings or mantras !! The State should look at the tourist industry who financially rape parents year in year out. This is hysterical media bullshit and of course let us look at the makeup of those who made the decision namely the Supreme Court, any Comprehensive CV's in there ??

Why didn't he just pay the £120.

I'll be honest that was my first thought as well.

As stated above....principle......common sense should prevail .....

Surely there is a common sense middle ground here?
I understand the point of the rule. When I was in school in the 90's / 00's, it was a lot more lenient than now, but you did have the families who totally took the mick and dragged their kid out so often that it was incredibly disruptive, not only to the child but to the rest of the class (as the teacher then had to spend time going over things multiple times because different kids had missed it the first time around). But prosecution seems way over the top.

Nt sure how he lost this case

He challenged on the grounds of high absence I don't see 5 days of a school year as high absence.

I regularly had tonsillitis in school and probably lost a whole year between 3-16 came out with 12 GCSEs A-C and I have a degree

So do they monitor home schooling? Do they check these kids only go on holidays during normal term time?

Absurd if you ask me

If your taking your kids on holidays once a year in school time I don't see the issue personally I know a few people who have jobs where they struggle to get holidays in July and August so if they don't take them when they both can get time Off they don't go

The line kids don't need a holiday is disgusting also who has the right to say a child doesn't deserve a nice break from normal daily life I certainly need one and I always liked forward to one as a kid folks always said it was a reward for doing well all year in school

Government is well out of touch with normal people as are the courts and judges ok for them say ruling on decisions that will have no effect on their lives one iota, I doubt the rises normal minimum wage families feel during summer holidays bother them one but probably tip waiters more than that a year when out with their elite cronies

Isn't the ruling that each case should be individually examined by the Head teacher? I personally agree with this.

As a senior teacher myself. I would agree to a holiday in almost all cases.

Those which i would not...

Very high absence whereby the child's education is obviously being affected. I'm talking missing lots of weeks of the year.

And that there is a difference in each holiday. There are arguments,as above, that a trip to Tenerife can include education. I don't argue with that. But a week in Butlins Skegness.

I regularly have children missing term time. Dad's work tends to be busy until May. Then they're back in work in July. My school is decimated at the end of the football season. Dad can't just up and have a holiday during the season. To me, I agree that they should be allowed to spend time as a family and that this is important.

I know one football family that hadn't had a holiday with dad for years. He missed out on selection for Euro 16, kid was so happy that they actually got to go on holiday with dad for once!

Family time is important as is education.

Common sense from the Heads is what's needed. Unfortunately i know a fair few that lack as much.

Isn't the ruling that each case should be individually examined by the Head teacher? I personally agree with this.

As a senior teacher myself. I would agree to a holiday in almost all cases.

Those which i would not...

Very high absence whereby the child's education is obviously being affected. I'm talking missing lots of weeks of the year.

And that there is a difference in each holiday. There are arguments,as above, that a trip to Tenerife can include education. I don't argue with that. But a week in Butlins Skegness.

I regularly have children missing term time. Dad's work tends to be busy until May. Then they're back in work in July. My school is decimated at the end of the football season. Dad can't just up and have a holiday during the season. To me, I agree that they should be allowed to spend time as a family and that this is important.

I know one football family that hadn't had a holiday with dad for years. He missed out on selection for Euro 16, kid was so happy that they actually got to go on holiday with dad for once!

Family time is important as is education.

Common sense from the Heads is what's needed. Unfortunately i know a fair few that lack as much.

Very well put and balanced view fair play