Clive Rawlings

Call:1994

Introduction & Contact Details

Clive is a Legal 500 and Chambers UK leading specialist counsel who acts extensively in the High Court, County Court and Tribunal for applicants and respondents and is well respected and sought after for his client friendly and team approach.  He has particular insight into education matters due to his previous career as a teacher and education officer for children with special educational needs.  He has acted in several of the most recent and pivotal education law cases dealing with exclusions and admissions and the impact of the Human Rights Act.

“...instils confidence, is a skilled strategist, with innovative tactics when needed.” – The Legal 500 (2009)

"...especially talented at questioning experts." - Chambers UK (2009)

"...very personable and has phenomenal knowledge" - The Legal 500 (2008)

Tel:    020 7242 2523 (switchboard)
Fax:   020 7691 1234

Email: clive.rawlings@hardwicke.co.uk

COMMERCIAL

Clive’s practice encompasses a large number of interesting and wide-ranging facets but the majority of his work is based around the issues which arise from negligent actions by authorities or their advisors.

Professional Negligence

Clive has a significant and successful professional negligence practice which focuses particularly on the negligence arising through education cases. He has a large amount of experience advising and representing individuals, private companies and local authorities in their litigation against negligent teachers, psychologists, care professionals, behavioural specialists, and legal advisors.

Relevant Cases

Toth v Jarman [2006] EWCA Civ 1028
Cinical negligence case argued before the Court of Appeal, examining whether a judgment should be set aside on the ground that an expert witness failed to disclose conflict of interest.

PUBLIC LAW

Clive has experience of all levels of administrative law courts and tribunals, including the High Courts, the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords. He has particular expertise in the duties of the statutory bodies, education law, judicial review, professional discipline and public liability. 

Education

Hardwicke Building’s Education team continues to be ranked as one of the top Education teams at the Bar. The Legal 500 Directory 2009 recommends Hardwicke’s ‘excellent clerking, particularly when speed is of the essence, with good business understanding‘.

Clive has acted in several of the most recent and pivotal education law cases dealing with exclusions and admissions and the impact of the Human Rights Act and has a consistent track record of appearances in the High Court.  

Clive has been appointed to the Disability Rights Commission litigation panel for education barristers.

Relevant Cases

R (on the application of Wharton) v Kent County Council [2009] EWHC 1790 (Admin)
Case where the authority’s choice of school not in accordance with claimant's parents' wishes and whether the authority was acting irrationally or in breach of its public law duties in respect of refusal to amend the child’s statement.

Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council v First-Tier Tribunal (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber) and another [2009] EWHC 1694 (Admin)
Case of a child with learning difficulties where the parents appealed a decision of the authority where they decided the child should attend a new school.

R (Arratoon) v Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education [2008] EWHC 3125 (Admin)
Acted for the claimant in a case examining whether an adjudicator should have recommend that the university's appeal process be completed regarding a student on a PGCE.

R (on the application of P) v Haringey Borough Council [2008] EWHC 2357 (Admin)
Acted for the claimant in case examining the Governor's Disciplinary Committee decision to confirm a headteacher's decision to exclude the claimant's son with disabilities.

R (on the application of O) v Independent Appeal Panel of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets [2007] EWHC 1455 (Admin)
Case of the permanent exclusion of child following fight on school grounds.

T v Governing Body of OL School & SENDIST [2005] EWCH 753 Admin
Case concerning the school’s decision to exclude a child with a Special Education Needs Statement.

Governing Body of PPc v DS,. CAS & SENDIST [2005] EWCH 1036 Admin
Case examining disability discrimination in schools.

N, The Queen (ota) v the Headteacher of X School and others [2002] ELR 187
Case of bias within school. Two children had been excluded after a fight, and the decision to exclude one of the children was taken by a teacher who had been involved in the child’s case.

S, T and P v LB Brent and others, Oxfordshire CC Headteacher of Elliott School and others: SS for Education and Skills [2002] ELR 556
The appellants, S, T and P, whose individual appeals were heard together, had all been permanently excluded from their respective schools.

The Queen on the Application of B v the Head Teacher of Alperton Community School and others [2001] ELR 359, QB
The applicant had been refused admission to the school because his application to this Roman Catholic school was not supported by a priest's signature on the application form and so did not meet the admissions criteria for being accorded a high priority. They challenged the compatibility of the provisions with Art 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 (the Convention), asserting that the appeal panel was not an 'independent and impartial tribunal'.

R v Headmaster and Independent Appeal Committee of Dunraven School, ex parte B CA [2000] ELR 156
Judicial review case, regarding a child’s exclusion from and the fairness of a hearing before the governors and independent appeal committee, especially as regards reliance on statement of another pupil implicating applicant but not disclosed to applicant.

P v Swansea County Council & Davies [2000] QBD TLR 1
Although exceptional, it was lawful to name a pupil referral unit as an appropriate school for a child with special educational needs pursuant to part IV of the Education Act 1996.

Human Rights & Civil Liberties

Clive acts for both claimants (including children and vulnerable adults) and local authorities within this area including judicial review proceedings, claims in negligence and advisory work in respect of the duties of local authorities. He has secured successful outcomes for clients via this route.

Relevant Cases

The Queen on the Application of B v the Head Teacher of Alperton Community School and others [2001] ELR 359, QB
The applicant had been refused admission to the school because his application to this Roman Catholic school was not supported by a priest's signature on the application form and so did not meet the admissions criteria for being accorded a high priority. They challenged the compatibility of the provisions with Art 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 (the Convention), asserting that the appeal panel was not an 'independent and impartial tribunal'.

Judicial Review

Clive has developed a healthy judicial review practice since joining Hardwicke Building.  He acts on behalf of applicants and respondent local authorities in decisions ranging from education to medical spheres.

Relevant Cases

R (Arratoon) v Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education [2008] EWHC 3125 (Admin)
Acted for the claimant in a case examining whether an adjudicator should have recommend that the university's appeal process be completed regarding a student on a PGCE.

R (on the application of P) v Haringey Borough Council [2008] EWHC 2357 (Admin)
Acted for the claimant in case examining the Governor's Disciplinary Committee decision to confirm a headteacher's decision to exclude the claimant's son with disabilities.

R (on the application of O) v Independent Appeal Panel of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets [2007] EWHC 1455 (Admin)
Case of the permanent exclusion of child following fight on school grounds.

The Queen on the Application of B v the Head Teacher of Alperton Community School and others [2001] ELR 359, QB
The applicant had been refused admission to the school because his application to this Roman Catholic school was not supported by a priest's signature on the application form and so did not meet the admissions criteria for being accorded a high priority. They challenged the compatibility of the provisions with Art 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 (the Convention), asserting that the appeal panel was not an 'independent and impartial tribunal'.

R v Headmaster and Independent Appeal Committee of Dunraven School, ex parte B CA [2000] ELR 156
Judicial review case, regarding a child’s exclusion from and the fairness of a hearing before the governors and independent appeal committee, especially as regards reliance on statement of another pupil implicating applicant but not disclosed to applicant.

Professional Discipline & Regulation

Relevant Cases

R v General Medical Council and Interested Party QBD TLR
Case decided that GMC procedures must become open and comply with 1998 Human Rights Act.

ACADEMIC

He is on the Editorial Panel of Informa UK Education Law Course and wrote:

• Module 4: School Attendance
• Module 5: Behaviour, Discipline, Exclusion and Children out of school.