Judicial review challenge to SEND reforms

Rook Irwin Sweeney, a specialist public law and human rights firm, has initiated a judicial review challenge on behalf of a child with complex special educational needs against the Secretary of State for Education, Bridget Phillipson. The challenge specifically targets the Government's "SEND reform: putting children and young people first" consultation launched on 23 February 2026, claiming it is unfair and irrational. The consultation, along with the White Paper “Every child achieving and thriving”, sets out the government's proposals for reforming Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) provisions in England. It invites responses to 40 questions from stakeholders before 18 May 2026.

Key proposals within the 132-page consultation document include altering the powers of the Special Educational and Disability Tribunal (‘SEND Tribunal’) regarding Education, Health and Care Plans (‘EHCPs’) and shifting the legal responsibility from local authorities to schools to deliver the educational offer in an EHCP. The proposed claimant, Jessica Hayhurst, who has an EHCP and attends an independent special school, is represented by her mother, Melissa Hayhurst. Melissa is deeply concerned about the potential negative implications these changes could have on parental appeal rights and the enforceability of EHCPs.

Critically, the consultation does not include questions addressing these significant proposals nor does it provide comprehensive explanations of the changes. The brief mention of the shift of legal duties is seen as insufficient. Melissa Hayhurst articulates this concern, stating, “If the Government is serious about children’s rights, it must be honest about proposals that would reduce protections for very vulnerable children like Jessica which could make EHCPs impossible to enforce.” She argues that families require a consultation that invites open scrutiny to improve the system rather than one that evades critical questions.

The claimant is seeking an amended version of the consultation that would provide additional clarifications and specific questions to address these ramifications. A response from the Secretary of State is currently awaited. Polly Sweeney and Beth Parr from Rook Irwin Sweeney are representing the claimant, supported by the firm’s Social Justice Fund and pro bono assistance from counsel Steve Broach KC of 39 Essex Chambers. Sweeney expresses her unease, stating, “It is of real concern to our client that the consultation omits to include any questions on these important proposals which would appear to significantly weaken legal rights of children and young people with SEND and their parents. This is not fair.”

Moreover, she questions the alignment of these proposals with the government's stated aims of improving SEND outcomes, saying, “If it is truly committed to ‘the realisation of children’s rights’ and a ‘moral mission to do our very best by each and every child in our county', as its consultation response suggests, then why are legal rights being significantly weakened under these reforms?” As the judicial review progresses, the implications for children with SEND and their families hang in the balance.

Copyright & permissions