Judgment Approved by the court for handing down. R (on the application of the Governing Body of the Oratory School) v The Schools Adjudicator, The British Humanist Association & Secretary of State for Education Neutral Citation Number: [2015] EWHC 1012 (Admin) Case No: CO/4693/2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 17/04/2015 Before : MR JUSTICE COBB - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between : The Queen Claimant On the application of The Governing Body of the London Oratory School - and - The Schools Adjudicator Defendant -and- (1) The British Humanist Association Interested (2) The Secretary of State for Education Parties - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. Charles Béar QC & Mr. Julian Milford (instructed by Payne Hicks Beach) for the Claimants Mr. James Goudie QC & Ms Fiona Scolding (instructed by Treasury Solicitor) for the Defendant The First Interested Party was not represented Mr. Jonathan Moffett (instructed by Treasury Solicitor) for the Second Interested Party Hearing dates: 24-26 March 2015 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Approved Judgment Judgment Approved by the court for handing down. R (on the application of the Governing Body of the Oratory School) v The Schools Adjudicator, The British Humanist Association & Secretary of State for Education The Honourable Mr Justice Cobb: Introduction and Summary 1. By a Determination promulgated on 15 July 2014, School’s Adjudicator, Dr. Bryan Slater (“the Adjudicator”), concluded that the London Oratory School (“the School”) had been in breach of its statutory obligations in setting its admissions criteria for 2014 and 2015. By Claim dated 8 October 2014, the School challenges that Determination by way of judicial review; permission to pursue the Claim was granted on 10 November 2014. 2. This Claim, and indeed this judgment, is not about the quality of education available to pupils at the School; by all accounts, it is an outstanding and successful school with high standards of academic teaching. The School is, unsurprisingly in the circumstances, extraordinarily popular and is vastly oversubscribed year on year. Nor is this Claim, or this judgment, concerned with the principle of public-funding of education by schools with a ‘religious character’; this is clearly provided for in statute. This Claim, and this judgment, is only concerned with the lawfulness of the Adjudicator’s conclusions. 3. I explain below my reasons for granting the School in part the relief it seeks. In summary, the Claimants have succeeded in demonstrating that: i) The Adjudicator applied too stringent a test when concluding that the Governing Body of the School (as the relevant ‘admission authority’, per section 88 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 (‘SSFA 1998’)) had failed to ‘have regard’ to the published Guidance (2003) from the Archdiocese of Westminster (as it was required to do under the Department for Education’s School Admissions Code (2012) (“the Admissions Code”)) when setting its faith-based oversubscription criteria; ii) The Adjudicator’s conclusion that the Governing Body of the School had operated an admissions system which was socially selective, discriminatory, and unfairly disadvantageous to children from “less well-off” families was flawed, and was reached by a process which was procedurally unfair to the School; iii) The Adjudicator’s conclusion that the admissions forms published by the Governing Body of the School for 2015 were unclear in failing to identify what was meant by a ‘parent’ was Wednesbury unreasonable, failing to acknowledge (or even refer to) the relevant ‘definition’ section which appears prominently in the notes to support the admissions process; iv) That it was/would be permissible for the School to request parents’ baptismal certificates as proof of their Catholic faith; such a request does not offend against the Admissions Code; v) That (subject to there being clear and proper reason for departing from the Diocesan Guidance to which the School was obliged to have regard) it was/would be permissible for the School to include an over-subscription criterion seeking evidence of previous Catholic education in the manner which Judgment Approved by the court for handing down. R (on the application of the Governing Body of the Oratory School) v The Schools Adjudicator, The British Humanist Association & Secretary of State for Education the School adopted in 2014, and in 2015 (for Year 3 candidates only); the Adjudicator acted unlawfully in concluding that the School had breached the Admissions Code in including this criterion; vi) That, while I disagree with the School’s interpretation of Regulation 16 of the School Admissions (Admission Arrangements and Co-ordination of Admission Arrangements)(England) Regulations 2012 (“the 2012 Regulations”) in relation to consultation on its admissions processes, the Adjudicator was wrong to conclude that the School could show no evidence that it had as a matter of fact failed to make any meaningful attempt to bring the School’s proposed arrangements to the attention of the required consultees. In all other respects, I conclude that the Adjudicator reached conclusions which were lawful, or not otherwise susceptible to challenge. 4. I heard oral argument on the issues over three court days; many documents and legal authorities were subjected to intense, and repeated, examination. There was little common ground between the parties. I set out below, by way of index, the contents of this judgment. 1 The Oratory School (“the School”) 5-8 2 The School’s ‘Academy’ Status / Funding Agreement 9-13 3 The Statutory Framework and Admissions Code 14-18 4 The role of the Schools Adjudicator 19-21 5 The School’s admissions criteria [2009-2016] 22-28 6 The Diocesan Guidelines (2003) 29-36 7 The complaint by the British Humanist Association 37-38 (2013) 8 First Determination by the School’s Adjudicator 39-40 (August 2013) 9 Second Determination by the School’s Adjudicator 41-42 (July 2014) 10 The School’s Claim 43-44 (1) Failure to ‘have regard’ to the Diocesan Guidance 45-48 What is meant by ‘have regard’ in para.1.38 of 49-61 the Admissions Code? The Adjudicator’s approach to the test 62-67 (2) Socio-economic discrimination 68-85 (3) Catholic Service 86-92 (4) Catholicity: Parent or parents 93-97 (5) Request for parents’ baptismal certificates 98-101 (6) Previous Catholic education 102-106 (7) Choristers 107-110 (8) Medical and social need 111-114 (9) Parents’ signature(s) 115-117 (10) Consultation on admissions criteria 118-127 11 Conclusion 128-130 Judgment Approved by the court for handing down. R (on the application of the Governing Body of the Oratory School) v The Schools Adjudicator, The British Humanist Association & Secretary of State for Education The Oratory School 5. The School was founded in 1863, and is located in Fulham, London SW6. It offers education to boys aged 7 to 18, and girls between the ages of 16 and 18. It is part of the Catholic Church with a philosophy and liturgical tradition which dates back to 16th Century Rome, and specifically to the Patron Saint of the School, St Philip Neri. St Philip Neri, an Italian priest who devoted his energies to the teaching of young men, formed an influential movement in the Catholic Church called the Congregation of the Oratory. St Philip Neri also gave his name to the London Oratory Church; the School and Oratory Church maintain close links with one another, sharing strong liturgical traditions. When the School was founded, its mission was to offer Catholic education for the benefit of Catholic children from all over London; that continues to be one of its key objectives today. Indeed, the pupils are drawn from over 300 parishes and primary schools, and 40 local education authority areas in and around London; it is reported that fifty three languages are spoken in the School, and that over 70% of its pupils travel more than 5kms to attend the School. 6. Religious worship plays a substantial part in school life; the admissions process of the School has, thus far, ensured that its pupils are fully committed and practising members of the Catholic Church. In pursuing the objectives of Cardinal John Newman (who introduced the Oratorians to England in the nineteenth century), the strong religious ethos, in the Canonical tradition, is combined with academic strength. The School’s Ofsted and other independent inspection reports describe the school as “outstanding”. 7. The School espouses two distinct and fundamental objectives: i) To serve the Catholic community across the whole of the London area (referred to in the documents as its “pan-London mission”); and ii) To preserve and enhance strong Catholic religious and academic teaching in the spiritual and musical traditions of the oratories of St Philip Neri. 8. The School is, unsurprisingly, very popular; the places (usually approximately 160 places for admission in Year 7) are, each year, vastly over-subscribed (typically, there are more than 800 applicants). The School is concerned to minimise the extent of random selection of its pupils while promoting its strong Catholic ethos. The School has been subject to a relatively high number of challenges to its admissions procedures in the past, including a previous challenge from the British Humanist Association. Notable among previous challenges (albeit a largely unsuccessful one) is the decision of Jackson J (as he then was) in Governing Body of the London Oratory School (& others) v School’s Adjudicator [2004] EWHC 3014 (Admin), [2005] ELR 162 – a case decided under a different statutory regime. I return to discuss this decision later. The School’s ‘Academy’ Status / Funding Agreement 9. The School began life as a charitable religious foundation. In its 150 year history it has enjoyed public funding support through various education models before, on 1 August 2011, becoming an Academy under section 1A of the Academies Act 2010 (“the 2010 Act”).