EHCP appeal reasons — the platform drafts your grounds of appeal | EHCP Clarity
EHCP preparation platform

EHCP appeal reasons — the platform drafts your grounds of appeal, you review and submit

Vague grounds are harder to advance at a hearing. The EHCP Clarity platform drafts your SEND35A grounds of appeal, parent statement, and evidence pack — structured around the statutory tests that apply to your decision type. You edit every word. £149/year.

Assess my route — freeBuild my appeal pack — £149/yearSee a real example pack

Case preparation support only · Not legal advice or tribunal representation

You tap · the platform drafts · you review and send

2Operator draftsWe do this
3You review & sendStay in control

Section B, F or I wrong? SEND law and council patterns shape your grounds and evidence table.

Relevant SEND law retrieved for your route

Drafted for you — ready to review

Build my pack — £149/year

Full interactive engine on our homepage · Example packs · Build my pack — £149/year

Quick answer

Effective grounds of appeal do three things: (1) state what the local authority decided; (2) explain why the decision was wrong — applying the wrong legal test, mischaracterising evidence, or failing to consider all relevant information; and (3) state what you want the Tribunal to order. Specificity and evidence references make all the difference.

Common grounds of appeal — by decision type

Refusal to assess

Section 36 CFA 2014

  • Parents argue the local authority applied a higher threshold — required certainty of EHCP rather than possibility
  • local authority failed to properly consider all professional reports submitted with the request
  • SEN support has not and cannot adequately meet the child's needs
  • New evidence has emerged since the local authority's decision that was not available to them
  • The child's needs are complex, fluctuating, or not yet fully assessed

Refusal to issue an EHCP

Section 37 CFA 2014

  • The assessment reports demonstrate SEN that cannot be met through school SEN support alone
  • The provision required exceeds what mainstream school resources can reasonably fund
  • The local authority's assertion that school can meet needs is not supported by the school's own evidence
  • The assessment was incomplete — key professionals were not consulted
  • The child's progress under SEN support has been inadequate despite sustained effort

EHCP contents — Section F (provision)

Section 51 CFA 2014

  • Section F provision is not specific — it lacks frequency, duration, or details of who delivers it
  • Provision is not sufficient to meet the needs described in Section B
  • Provision that was in a previous EHCP has been removed without evidential justification
  • The EHCP specifies provision 'as required' or 'where appropriate' rather than with specificity
  • Provision needed has been identified by a professional but is not included in Section F

EHCP contents — Section I (placement)

Section 51 CFA 2014

  • The named school cannot meet the child's needs as described in Section B
  • The preferred school is suitable and would not be incompatible with the efficient education of others
  • The named school is not the setting the child was attending or had been assessed at
  • No school has been named and the local authority has failed in its duty to name a school

Strong vs weak grounds: an example

Weak grounds

"The local authority has made the wrong decision. My child needs much more support than they are getting. We have been fighting for years and the school is not helping. We disagree strongly with what the local authority has decided."

Strong grounds

"The local authority refused to assess on the grounds that school SEN support is sufficient. However, the EP report of [date] identifies significant needs in working memory and processing speed at the 2nd percentile. The school's own records show no progress in reading in 18 months despite sustained graduated support. I argue the section 36 threshold was applied by requiring certainty of EHCP rather than possibility of necessity."

How to draft your grounds of appeal

  1. 1

    Identify the type of appeal you are making

    Different decisions require different grounds. A refusal to assess appeal focuses on the assessment threshold (section 36 CFA 2014). A contents appeal focuses on whether Section F is specific enough and whether provision is adequate. Know which type of decision you are challenging before you draft your grounds.

  2. 2

    State what the local authority decided

    Open your grounds by clearly describing what the local authority decided and when. 'On [date], the local authority notified me that it had decided to refuse an EHC needs assessment for my child, [name], on the grounds that...' This frames the appeal and shows the Tribunal exactly what it is reviewing.

  3. 3

    State the legal test and how you argue it applies

    Reference the relevant statutory provision and explain why you challenge the local authority's decision. For a refusal to assess: 'The test under section 36(3) CFA 2014 is whether assessment may be necessary. I argue the local authority required certainty that an EHCP will be needed, which is a higher threshold than the statute sets.'

  4. 4

    Identify factual errors

    Where the local authority has mischaracterised evidence or failed to consider a report, name it. 'The local authority's refusal letter states that [child's] reading difficulties are mild. However, the educational psychologist's report of [date] found that [child's] reading age is [X] years below chronological age and specifically recommends specialist literacy provision.' Specificity matters.

  5. 5

    State the outcome you want

    At the end of your grounds, clearly state what you want the Tribunal to order. 'I ask the Tribunal to order the local authority to carry out an EHC needs assessment of [child].' Or: 'I ask the Tribunal to order the local authority to amend Section F to include [specific provision].' Be precise — the Tribunal can only order what you ask for.

The legal tests to reference

Assessment threshold (refusal to assess)

s.36(3) CFA 2014

Necessary to determine whether EHC provision may be needed — a 'may be necessary' standard, not certainty

Duty to issue EHCP (refusal to issue)

s.37 CFA 2014

Must issue if the child has SEN and it is necessary for EHC provision to be made — 'necessary', not merely desirable

Contents of EHCP (Section F)

s.37 & s.42 CFA 2014

Provision must be specified with sufficient detail to be enforceable under the absolute s.42 duty — specific, quantified, attributable

Placement (Section I)

s.33 & Sch 3 CFA 2014

Where a parent requests a maintained school, it must be named unless incompatible with efficient education of others (and efficient use of resources)

Grounds of appeal checklist

  • You have stated clearly what the local authority decided and on what date
  • You have identified the correct legal test that applies to your appeal type
  • You have explained specifically why you argue the local authority did not apply that test correctly
  • You have identified and named the specific professional reports the local authority failed to properly consider
  • You have described the factual errors in the local authority's reasoning with specific examples
  • You have stated clearly what outcome you want the Tribunal to order
  • Your grounds are specific and factual — not primarily emotional
  • You have kept your grounds focused — you will develop them more fully in your evidence bundle

Common mistakes in grounds of appeal

  • Using vague language ('the local authority is wrong') without explaining why the specific reasons given are incorrect
  • Focusing on emotional impact rather than the legal test and the evidence
  • Not referencing professional reports by name and date
  • Trying to cover every issue in the SEND35A grounds — focus on the key issues and expand in your bundle
  • Not stating the specific outcome sought — the Tribunal can only order what you ask for
  • Confusing the assessment threshold (s.36) with the EHCP threshold (s.37) — these are different legal tests

Frequently asked questions

What are 'grounds of appeal' in a SEND Tribunal context?
Grounds of appeal are the reasons you give on your SEND35A for why you disagree with the local authority's decision. They explain what the local authority decided, why that decision was wrong (legally and/or factually), and what outcome you want the Tribunal to order. Weak grounds say 'the local authority is wrong'; strong grounds explain precisely why — with reference to evidence and the legal threshold.
Does the strength of my grounds of appeal affect whether I win?
Yes — substantially. The Tribunal will review all the evidence, but well-drafted grounds help you focus the Tribunal's attention on the key issues and demonstrate that you have identified the legal error the local authority made. Vague or emotional grounds without specific legal or factual analysis are harder to build on. Specificity matters.
Can I amend my grounds of appeal after submitting the SEND35A?
Amending grounds after submission is possible but requires the Tribunal's permission and is at its discretion. It is better to state your main grounds clearly at submission and note that you will develop them with fuller evidence in your bundle. Do not try to cover every point at SEND35A stage — focus on the key issues.
What is the correct legal threshold for a refusal to assess appeal?
The local authority must carry out an EHC needs assessment if it considers it necessary to determine whether EHC provision is required. The test is whether assessment may be necessary — not whether an EHCP will definitely be needed. If the local authority has applied a higher threshold (requiring certainty), this is a ground of appeal.
What is the correct legal threshold for a refusal to issue appeal?
The local authority must issue an EHCP if the child has SEN and it is necessary for EHC provision to be made (section 37 CFA 2014). 'Necessary' is the key word — not 'desirable' or 'helpful'. The question is whether the provision needed to meet the child's needs can be secured without an EHCP. If it cannot, the threshold is met.
Can I include new evidence that the local authority did not have when it made its decision?
Yes. The Tribunal reviews the decision on the basis of all current evidence — including evidence that has emerged since the local authority's decision. Private assessments, updated school data, new professional reports, and parent evidence produced after the decision can all be included in your evidence bundle and considered at the hearing.
What is the difference between factual and legal grounds?
Factual grounds argue that the local authority got the facts wrong — for example, by mischaracterising a report, overlooking evidence, or failing to consider all the needs described. Legal grounds argue that the local authority applied the wrong legal test or failed to follow the correct procedure. Strong appeals often include both types of grounds.
Should I include my feelings in my grounds of appeal?
Your own account of how your child's unmet needs affect them is important evidence — but grounds of appeal are primarily factual and legal arguments, not emotional statements. A parent evidence statement (separate to the grounds) is where you describe the emotional and daily impact. In the grounds, focus on what the local authority decided, why it was wrong, and what the evidence shows.

Related guides

Sources and further reading

Email us