Discussion Forum

Not as such no, that is a specific legal doctrine which would not apply. I think the best argument is to say that the grounds are identical to those rejected by the tribunal in the previous appeal and there has been no material change in circumstances since then. The new tribunal has to decide matters afresh on the basis of the evidence before it but the previous tribunal's decision is relevant and important. In practice, I would expect the tribunal to look to the parents to explain what has changed in the last year and only come to a different conclusion if it thought there had been any material change in circumstances. This may not be difficult to establish as a lot can change in a year. But it is an argument that cuts both ways - a LA which lost a tribunal and then a year later amended the EHC plan to read as if it had won would be likely to lose again unless something was different.