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."
What strong cases do next
- 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
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
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(8) CFA 2014 is whether the child has or may have SEN and it may be necessary for special educational provision to be made in accordance with an EHC plan. I argue the local authority required certainty that an EHCP will be needed, which is a higher threshold than the statute sets.'
2 further steps when you submit or appeal — Requesting, appealing, and negotiating Section F are where most parents need help — that is what we prepare for you.
This guide shows what strong cases look like. We prepare the request letter, appeal grounds, or plan letter for your route.
The legal tests to reference
Assessment threshold (refusal to assess)
s.36(8) CFA 2014Has/may have SEN, and it may be necessary for SEP in accordance with an EHC plan — not certainty that a plan will be issued
Duty to issue EHCP (refusal to issue)
s.37 CFA 2014Must 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 2014Provision 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 2014Where 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
3 more items depending on your case. Plus turning this evidence into one coherent pack an LA or tribunal takes seriously.
This guide shows what strong cases look like. We prepare the request letter, appeal grounds, or plan letter for your route.
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
This guide shows what strong cases look like. We prepare the request letter, appeal grounds, or plan letter for your route.