NZLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Court of Appeal of New Zealand

You are here:  NZLII >> Databases >> Court of Appeal of New Zealand >> 2021 >> [2021] NZCA 363

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Decisions | Noteup | LawCite | Download | Help

Ford v Board of Trustees for Smith Primary School [2021] NZCA 363; [2021] 3 NZLR 738 (2 August 2021)

Last Updated: 25 October 2022

For a Court ready (fee required) version please follow this link

NOTE: THE IDENTITY OF THE APPELLANT, THE CHILD AND THE SCHOOL IS PERMANENTLY SUPPRESSED.
CONFIDENTIALITY ORDERS APPLY TO THE EVIDENCE FILED. THE FILE IS NOT TO BE SEARCHED WITHOUT LEAVE OF A JUDGE OF THIS
COURT.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND
I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA
CA399/2021
[2021] NZCA 363

BETWEEN
FORD
Appellant
AND
BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR SMITH PRIMARY SCHOOL
Respondent

Hearing:
8 July 2021
Court:
Brown, Clifford and Goddard JJ
Counsel:
A S Butler and S W H Fletcher for Appellant P A Robertson and C T Child for Respondent
S P Connolly and A M Piaggi for Secretary for Education as Intervener
Judgment:
15 July 2021 at 3.00 pm
Reasons:
2 August 2021

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

A The appellant’s application to adduce further evidence is declined. B The appeal is allowed.

  1. The following declarations are made:

(i) The purported revocation of the appellant’s place at Smith Primary School was unlawful.

FORD v BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR SMITH PRIMARY SCHOOL [2021] NZCA 363 [15 July 2021]

(ii) The offer letter remains valid and the appellant is entitled to enrol at Smith Primary School in accordance with ss 33 and 74(2)(a) of the Education and Training Act 2020 on Monday 26 July 2021 or on such later date as may be agreed by the appellant’s parents and Smith Primary School.

  1. The respondent must pay the appellant costs for a standard appeal on a band A basis with usual disbursements. We certify for two counsel.
  1. Direction under r 5(2) of the Senior Courts (Access to Court Documents) Rules 2017 that documents or files of any kind related to the appeal may not be accessed, except by the parties, without permission of this Court.

Table of Contents

Para No

Introduction [1]

The statutory scheme [7]

Relevant facts [17]

The enrolment scheme [17]

Bella’s application [22]

The decision to withdraw the offer of a place [27]

The High Court judgment [30]

Issue on appeal [35]

The application to adduce further evidence [37]

Submissions [38]

Appellant’s submissions [38]

Respondent’s submissions [40]

Submissions of the Secretary [44]

Enrolment schemes: an overview [50]

The home zone [51]

In-zone students [53]

Out-of-zone students [56]

The present case [61]

Analysis [64]

Text [65]

Purpose [75]

Conclusion [86]

Relief [89]

Result [91]

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Brown J)

Introduction

1 Approximately 11 months before Bella’s fifth birthday.

2 Ford v A School Board of Trustees [2021] NZHC 1608 [High Court judgment].

The statutory scheme

Except as provided in this Part, every domestic student is entitled to free enrolment and free education at any State school during the period beginning on the student’s fifth birthday and ending on 1 January after the student’s 19th birthday.

However the right to attend any State school is qualified in relation to schools which have an enrolment scheme.

3 Ford v Board of Trustees for Smith Primary School [2021] NZCA 321.

  1. Section 33 came into force on 1 August 2020, the day after the date on which the Act received the Royal assent. Its predecessor, s 3 of the Education Act 1989 (1989 Act), was in essentially similar terms.

5 See s 12 of the 1989 Act as originally enacted.

74 How enrolment schemes work

(1) A person who lives in the home zone of a State school that has an enrolment scheme is entitled to enrol at that school.

(2) An applicant for enrolment at a school with an enrolment scheme who lives outside the school’s home zone is entitled to enrol at the school only—

(a) if the applicant is offered a place at the school in accordance with the procedure set out in the enrolment scheme;

...

71 Purpose and principles

(1) The purpose of the enrolment scheme of a State school is—

(a) to avoid overcrowding, or the likelihood of overcrowding, at the school; and

(b) to ensure that the selection of applicants for enrolment at the school is carried out in a fair and transparent manner; and

(c) to enable the Secretary to make the best use of existing networks of State schools.

(2) In achieving its purpose, the enrolment scheme of every State school must, as far as possible, ensure that—

(a) the scheme does not exclude local students; and

(b) no more students are excluded from the school than is necessary to avoid overcrowding at the school.

  1. The former section was headed “Effect of home zone”. Also s 11D(1) commenced with the words, “Subject to the provisions of this Act”.
  2. Overcrowding means the attendance at the school of more students than its site or facilities can reasonably be expected to take: Education and Training Act 2020, s 10(1) (2020 Act).

8 Section 72(1).

  1. Section 73(a); and sch 20, cl 1(1). This must be an area for which the school is a reasonably convenient school for a student living in that area to attend: sch 20, cl 1(2)(a).

10 Section 72(2).

11 Section 11A was the equivalent provision in the 1989 Act.

5 Requirements relating to proposed enrolment schemes

An enrolment scheme for a State school—

(a) must comply with the purpose and principles of enrolment schemes set out in section 71; and

(b) must define the school’s home zone in the enrolment scheme in a way that ensures that students can attend a reasonably convenient school; and

(c) may have boundaries for its school’s home zone that overlap or are contiguous with the boundaries of the home zone of any adjacent State school that has an enrolment scheme; and

(d) must promote the best use of the network of State schools in the area.

The equivalent provision in the 1989 Act12 required the Secretary to additionally be satisfied that:

(e) the procedures for determining which applicants who live outside the home zone will be offered places at the school comply with section 11F and any instructions issued under section 11G; and

(f) the Board has carried out adequate consultation under section 11H.

An application for enrolment at a school with an enrolment scheme must be processed by the school in accordance with the enrolment scheme, and may not be declined on technical grounds or on any other ground that would be inconsistent with the purpose and principles set out in section 71.

12 Section 11I(1).

13 2020 Act, sch 20, cl 2(1).

  1. Schedule 20, cl 2(2). This is except for the first priority group for applicants accepted into a special programme run by the school.

15 Section 11F(5) was the equivalent provision in the 1989 Act.

3 Instructions and guidelines on operation of enrolment schemes

(1) The Secretary may issue instructions to State schools that have enrolment schemes about the following matters:

(a) the procedures for holding ballots:

(b) the dates on which ballots are to be held:

(c) the establishment and maintenance of waiting lists:

(d) the information to be given to applicants who live outside the school’s home zone:

(e) any other matter that the Secretary considers necessary for ensuring the fair, transparent, and efficient operation of enrolment schemes.

Schools must comply with instructions issued under cl 3(1).17

(3) The Secretary may issue guidelines to State schools about either or both of the following matters:

(a) the basis on which the Secretary’s powers in relation to enrolment schemes may be exercised (including, in particular, the power in clause 14(2)(a) relating to the determination of whether an applicant lives within a home zone or outside it);

(b) the manner in which schools must conduct reviews under clause 13 (which relates to the review of a student’s enrolment).

Relevant facts

The enrolment scheme

16 Section 11G was the equivalent provision in the 1989 Act.

17 Clause 3(2)(a).

Out of Zone Enrolments

Each year the Board of Trustees will determine the number of places which are likely to be available in the following year for the enrolment of students who live outside the home zone. The Board will publish this information by notice in a daily or community newspaper circulating in the area served by the school. The notice will indicate how applications are to be made and will specify a date by which all applications must be received.

Applications for enrolments will be processed in the following order of priority:

[The priority categories were then explained].

If there are more applicants in the second, third, fourth or fifth priority groups than there are places available, Selection within the priority group will be by ballot conducted in accordance with instructions by the Secretary. Under Section 11G(1) [of] the Education Act 1989. Parents will be informed of the date of any ballot by notice in a daily or community newspaper circulating in the area served by the school.

18 Hence the first of the six statutory priority categories did not apply.

19 We have not seen the instructions which applied at the time the School’s enrolment scheme was implemented. However we record that a letter from the Ministry of Education to the School Board conveying approval of the School’s enrolment scheme stated:

When you are preparing for a ballot to select out of zone students, please pay particular attention to the requirements contained in the Secretary’s Instructions relating to the operation of enrolment schemes.

scheme at appendix 1. Appendix 2 contained draft notices, administrative documents and letters to parents for use by boards of trustees.

Bella’s application

Thank you for your application for enrolment of [Bella] at [Smith Primary] School.

This year we will not be holding a ballot for out-of-zone students as all of the places available will be filled by siblings of current students, therefore I am able to offer [Bella] a place at our school for next year.

As we have adopted a Cohort Policy, [Bella] will be eligible to start at the beginning of Term 3 on Monday 26 July 2021, however we will discuss this with you closer to the time.

Please confirm your acceptance of the place in writing, or alternatively indicate that you will not be taking up the offer. A tear-off slip is provided for your convenience. Your reply must reach the school no later than 14 November 2020.

I look forward to hearing from you.

The decision to withdraw the offer of a place

(a) The optimum roll for Smith Primary School is 208. However, overcrowding is a more complex analysis depending upon the numbers, for example, at each level. The Ministry sets ratios for the school for each year, which presently are:

Year 1 – one teacher in one teaching space with 15 students;

Years 2 and 3 – one teacher in each teaching space with 23 students; and

Years 4–8 – one teacher in each teaching space with 29 students.

(b) Smith Primary School has three teaching spaces for Years 1–3. It needs four, as it has 85 students. The School is this year using a lined garage out of which to teach the 15 Year 1 students. It is a limited space, and is neither a designed classroom nor a designated teaching space. The curriculum is limited by this. Some aspects of the curriculum must be taught elsewhere

20 High Court judgment, above n 2.

meaning the students have to move to other spaces and at times just fit in with the other 70 children in their space.

(c) 2020 was not a typical year. One of the neighbouring schools was experiencing overcrowding so decided not to advertise at all for out-of-zone applications. It is seeking to review its home area zone to address the issue; this will have potential knock-on effects to neighbouring schools. Another neighbouring school has no numbers issues so did not have a ballot process for the opposite reasons, namely that all applicants would be accepted.

(d) Smith Primary School estimated likely home zone numbers and thought it could accommodate all the out-of-zone applications in priority group [two], being those with siblings at school. Accordingly no ballot for group [two] was done, but all five applicants were offered places. This is the first time a ballot has not been held. It was expected the school would not reach capacity until Term 4, 2021.

(e) The principal, however, deposes:

The influx of students we received over the December 2020 to March 2021 period was simply unprecedented. We have never seen this kind of growth in the School nor in the wider ‘home-zone’ population.

(f) The school received six unexpected home zone applications between August and December 2020. It was thought at the time that this could be accommodated but then at the start of 2021, a further seven were received. This led the school to conclude it was not viable to maintain the out-of-zone Year 1 offers.

(g) The principal identifies several reasons for withdrawing the offer of enrolment:

(a) the increased numbers;

(b) the pressure currently on staff, students, and resources. The school is described as stretched and struggling to accommodate existing students;

(c) the workload on the new entrant teacher, and on external agencies that assist;

(d) the current poor building resource for existing Year 1 students; and

(e) planned classroom remodelling in the balance of 2021.

The High Court judgment

(a) the offer was made on the implied condition that there were sufficient places available for out-of-zone children once all in-zone students enrolled;

(b) nothing in the offer letter guaranteed Bella an absolute right of enrolment under s 33;

(c) the School had reason to believe the enrolling of Bella was likely to cause overcrowding and therefore the Act required that Bella not be enrolled;

(d) the School was informed by the Secretary that it would be unlawful to enrol Bella due to overcrowding and the School withdrew the offer of enrolment on the advice and guidance of the Secretary.

21 High Court judgment, above n 2, at [33].

Issue on appeal

(a) in departing from “normal interpretation principles” when interpreting section 74 of the Education and Training Act 2020 (“the Act”), and

22 At [28].

23 At [31].

24 At [35]–[36].

holding that the meaning of the phrase “entitled to enrol” in section 74(2) was different to the meaning of the phrase “entitled to enrol” in section 74(1) (Judgment at [34]);

(b) in failing to address the effect of section 33 of the Act, which gives all children a right to attend “any” school, and in particular in failing to address the effect of section 33 on the purpose of the Act;

(c) in finding that there was a power available for boards of trustees to revoke or withdraw places offered to out-of-zone students, despite section 74(2) of the Act and the absence of any statutory power permitting revocation or withdrawal (Judgment at [47]–[48]);

(d) in failing to follow this Court’s judgment in Goulding v Chief Executive, Ministry of Fisheries [2003] NZCA 244; [2004] 3 NZLR 173 (CA), where this Court held that final decisions which affect citizens’ rights are “irrevocable”; and

(e) in failing to address ... the fact that express discretionary powers to affect enrolment rights for students are generally vested in the Secretary of Education (not boards of trustees), and the circumstances in which they can be exercised are tightly circumscribed (compare Judgment at [46]–[48]).

The application to adduce further evidence

25 Or under s 11D(2)(a) of the 1989 Act if the offer was made prior to 1 January 2021.

Submissions

Appellant’s submissions

Respondent’s submissions

26 See Inco Europe Ltd v First Choice Distribution [2000] UKHL 15; [2000] 1 WLR 586 (HL) at 592: “The court must be able to correct obvious drafting errors. In suitable cases, in discharging its interpretative function the court will add words, or omit words or substitute words.”

all students and enrol children in a manner that is commensurate with available resources. There were four strands to his argument.

27 Clause 14(3).

Submissions of the Secretary

(a) First, s 74(2)(a) applies only if there is an “extant” offer to the applicant at the relevant enrolment date.

(b) Second, an offer made prior to enrolment is by its very nature “conditional” in the sense that it is contingent on the School in fact having sufficient places at the time when the applicant intends to enrol.

assurances to parents of out-of-zone applicants while also ensuring as far as possible that a school is not overcrowded. The fact that pre-enrolment offers to out-of-zone children are by their nature conditional was said to be a necessary implication in light of the relevant statutory scheme. Mr Connolly maintained that the ability of a board to withdraw an offer does not require the reading in of a statutory power not given to the board by Parliament. Rather, the ability to withdraw an offer was said to be simply a tool available to the board of a State school in the management of its enrolment scheme in much the same way as the maintenance of a waiting list.

  1. The interpretation of s 74(2)(a) advanced by the appellant, whereby offers made prior to enrolment dates cannot be withdrawn, but instead guarantee an entitlement to enrol once made, would compromise the ability of boards to discharge their obligation to avoid (or at least reduce) overcrowding by using the primary tool at their disposal for that purpose: excluding out-of-zone applicants from enrolment. This would likely result in greater incidences of overcrowding and/or boards adopting overly conservative enrolment practices (for example by tending to underestimate likely available places for out-of-zone children).
  1. By contrast, the interpretation advanced by the Secretary supports the ability of boards to discharge their obligations and perform the balancing act required of them in doing so. In particular, it recognises that enrolment schemes are an iterative and ongoing process operating on the basis of two important distinctions. The first distinction is between in-zone and out-of-zone children. The second distinction is between the time period prior to enrolment and the time at which enrolment occurs.

Enrolment schemes: an overview

The home zone

exclude local students. The means of securing the objective of balancing the interests of local students with the avoidance of overcrowding is by the drawing of the geographical boundaries of the home zone defined in the enrolment scheme. Any student within that home zone has (what the Instructions describe as) “an absolute right of enrolment” at the school.28 As the Guidelines explain:29

It is important to understand, however, that the need to avoid overcrowding does not take precedence over the rights of enrolment that are guaranteed to in-zone students. This means that the board must determine a roll figure around which it can manage overcrowding while at the same time providing for the enrolment of all students who apply for enrolment from within the home zone. When the board draws up a home zone, it must do so with the capacity of the school in mind.

In-zone students

Pre-enrolment processes include the process of applying for entry to the school and, potentially, being accepted for enrolment. “Enrolment”, on the other hand, occurs when attendance at the school commences and the student is first marked as present on the school roll.

  1. Commentary to Instructions 1 and 34. Similarly the Guidelines refer to “an absolute entitlement”: at 3.

29 At 4.

30 At 4–5.

31 See for example sch 20, cls 6(3)(b) and cl 11 of the 2020 Act.

  1. At 14. The verb “enrol” is defined in s 10(1) of the 2020 Act to include “admit”, with “enrolment” and “enrolled” having corresponding meanings.
submitting either an application for enrolment33 or a “pre-enrolment form”.34 However the Guidelines make clear that a board cannot insist on pre-enrolments by in-zone students:35

A board cannot require applications for enrolment from in-zone students to be made by a certain date, because the legislation gives an absolute right of enrolment to any student who lives within the home zone.

Almost certainly, however, boards will wish to receive such applications by the same date set for receipt of out-of-zone applications, because boards have to quantify the number of places likely to be available for out-of-zone students before proceeding to a ballot. Therefore the board may include indicative dates for pre-enrolment of home zone students in the same notice as that giving information to out-of-zone applicants.

The Instructions further state that applications by in-zone students made subsequent to the pre-enrolment period must be accepted36 unlike out-of-zone students who cannot be enrolled unless a new ballot is arranged.37

Out-of-zone students

33 Clause 14(2)(a).

34 Clause 12(1).

35 At 14–15.

36 Instruction 29.

37 Instruction 30.

  1. The draft newspaper notice in appendix 2 of the Guidelines included such advice to parents of in-zone students.
  2. At [18] above, save for the paragraphs in the pro forma scheme addressing special programme priority.
and states that the published notice will indicate how applications are to be made and by when.

INSTRUCTIONS BALLOTS
...
COMMENTARY

...
15. Each of the second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth priority groupings must be considered in turn. If the number of applicants within a particular priority grouping is less than the total number of remaining available places, all applicants within the grouping must be offered enrolment. Otherwise, a ballot will be required, and all applicants within the grouping must be included in the ballot.




...
A couple of examples may be helpful. Let us suppose that a secondary school determines that it has 40 spaces available at year 9 for out of zone students in the following year. Let us also suppose that of the 70 out of zone applications that it receives, 6 are from siblings of present students. All of these must be enrolled. The next to be considered are siblings of former students, of which there are 9. All of these must be enrolled. Similarly the 2 children of board employees must also be enrolled. This leaves 53 other students, who must be balloted because only 23 places remain.
...
20. Names drawn in the ballot must be recorded in the order in which they are drawn, up to the limit of the number of places available (either in total or at a particular level, as the case may be). Beyond that point, names must be recorded on a waiting list in the order in which they are drawn in
the ballot. ...
...
a matter on which the Secretary may issue instructions.40 The role of the waiting list is evident in Instruction 24:

PROCEDURES SUBSEQUENT TO BALLOTS
...
COMMENTARY
24. If parents of successful applicants decline to accept the places offered, or fail to respond within the 14 day period, the board must offer the vacant places to unsuccessful applicants in the order in which their names are recorded on the waiting list. This process should continue until all available places (as specified by the board at the date of the ballot) have been filled or no names remain on the waiting list.
...

(a) To parents of an out-of-zone applicant unsuccessful in a ballot:

A ballot has recently been held for places available for out of zone students and I regret to have to inform you that < name > was not successful. The names of unsuccessful applicants were listed in the order in which they were drawn in the ballot and were then placed on a waiting list. < Name > is number < give number > on the waiting list.

I have asked parents of successful applicants to inform me within 14 days whether or not they wish to accept the place that has been offered. Any vacant places that result from this process will be offered to unsuccessful applicants in the order in which their names appear on the waiting list.

(b) To parents of an out-of-zone applicant successful in a ballot:

A ballot has recently been held for places available for out-of-zone students and I am pleased to be able to inform you that < name > was successful. I am therefore able to offer him/her a place at our school for next year (or in the next enrolment intake”).

40 2020 Act, sch 20, cl 3(1)(c). See at [15] above.

You will appreciate that a number of applicants were not successful in the ballot. Please confirm your acceptance of the place in writing, or alternatively indicate that you will not be taking up the offer. A tear-off slip is provided for your convenience. Your reply must reach the school no later than < a date that is 14 days from the date on this letter >. If confirmation is not received by this date, the place will be offered to the person currently at the head of the waiting list of applicants who were unsuccessful in the ballot.

(c) To parents of an out-of-zone applicant when no ballot was necessary:

The number of out-of-zone applications that the board received was fewer than the number of places that are expected to be available for out-of-zone students. I am therefore pleased to be able to offer

< name > a place at our school for next year (or “in the next enrolment intake”).

Please confirm your acceptance of the place in writing, or alternatively indicate that you will not be taking up the offer. A tear-off slip is provided for your convenience. Please reply by < a date that is 14 days from the date on this letter > to assist us with forward planning.

The tear-off slip in the second and third letters provided two options: acceptance or rejection of the offer of a place at the School.

The present case

41 At [22]–[23].

available were filled by the siblings. It inquired whether the parents would like their child to go in the ballot for 2022. There was no reference to a waiting list.

Analysis

Text

42 At [25].

43 At [31] above.

44 At [40] above.

  1. Commerce Commission v Fonterra Co-operative Group Ltd [2007] NZSC 36, [2007] 3 NZLR 767 at [22].

46 At [53] above.

to enrolment which are detailed in the Instructions and Guidelines are part of a pre-enrolment process. We note that both s 74(1) and (2) speak of the relevant person being “entitled to enrol”, which phrase was the focus of argument in the High Court. We will shortly revisit the significance of this point in the context of the argument advanced by both the respondent and the Secretary based on Bella’s age.

30. First, ... enrolment cannot occur prior to a child’s fifth birthday and enrolment occurs only on presentation at the school for attendance. It is at that time, ie the enrolment day, that whether the relevant statutory criteria are satisfied should be tested. As the High Court noted the appellant’s interpretation would give insufficient weight to the timing of enrolment and how subsection (1) applies for in-zone children. By contrast, the Secretary’s interpretation means that the meaning of

“entitled to enrol” is determined consistently in subsection (1) and subsection (2)(a).

(Footnote omitted.)

[35] That said, the applicant’s case gives insufficient weight to the fact that the home zone entitlement does not arise before a child turns five. It is at that date, or any date subsequent, that a child can present themselves. This matters because here the applicant is contending that Bella had an irrevocable right from a date not long after her fourth birthday. In that sense it seeks to accord a greater status to the out-of-zone child with an offer than the home zone child has. The home zone child must remain resident yet Bella is said to be absolutely entitled.

Retention of entitlement to enrolment

The determination of validity of an enrolment of an in-zone student, or enrolment of an out-of-zone student subsequent to a pre-enrolment selection process, is determined at the date of enrolment, which is the first day of attendance consequent on the pre-enrolment process. Once enrolled, the student is entitled to remain enrolled at the school until the end of the student’s schooling (for the year levels provided by the school), unless the enrolment is annulled under section 11O, terminated under another provision of the Act, or the student enrols at another school.

This means, for example, that if a student was living in-zone at the time of enrolment, but the student and family later move to an out-of-zone address in circumstances where there is no ground for annulment under s 11O (i.e. it is not a case of a temporary residence being used for the purpose of gaining enrolment) then the student is entitled to remain enrolled until completion of their schooling.

47 High Court judgment, above n 2, at [34].

Purpose

48 See the Secretary’s submission at [70] above.

49 2020 Act, s 71(1)(a).

50 Schedule 20, clause 3(1)(e).

objective is in effect reiterated in cl 2(5) of sch 20 in requiring that enrolment applications must be processed consistently with the s 71 purpose and principles.

51 Schedule 20, clause 6(4)(c).

52 At [59] above.

53 At [84]–[85] below.

52. This matter has never been about the enrolment of just one more student to me. This is about the potential enrolment of 5 additional ‘out-of-zone’ students, who are all in the same position (and six ‘in-zone’ students, who are entitled to enrol, and are already straining the School’s capacity). There is no way for me to pick and choose which of the five ‘out-of-zone’ applicants may be enrolled if a place becomes available, so I determined that it was appropriate and fair for me to advise all 5 applicants of the same outcome; being that they are unable to enrol in Term 3 and should defer enrolment until Term 1, 2022.

Interestingly the affidavit further stated that all five applicants are now numbers one to five on the School’s priority list and that Bella is currently in number one spot.

54 At [40].

Conclusion

55 Goulding v Chief Executive, Ministry of Fisheries [2003] NZCA 244; [2004] 3 NZLR 173 (CA).

56 At [43].

57 At [34].

is nothing in the 2020 Act to support a different approach in relation to offers made under s 74(2)(a). Rather, this approach is consistent with the requirement in the Act that enrolment schemes operate on a fair and transparent basis. Once an unconditional offer of a place has been communicated, the child and their family can be expected to act on the basis of that offer. It would not be fair or transparent, or consistent with the requirements of good administration, for such an offer to be withdrawn in the absence of an express power to do so.

Relief

Result

(i) The purported revocation of the appellant’s place at Smith Primary School was unlawful.

(ii) The offer letter remains valid and the appellant is entitled to enrol at Smith Primary School in accordance with ss 33 and 74(2)(a) of the Education and Training Act 2020 on Monday 26 July 2021 or on such later date as may be agreed by the appellant’s parents and Smith Primary School.

Solicitors:

Woods Fletcher, Wellington for Appellant Heaney & Partners, Auckland for Respondent

58 Senior Courts Act 2016, s 178(2)(c).


NZLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.nzlii.org/nz/cases/NZCA/2021/363.html