Can multiple schools be named in section I of an EHCP where the primary placement school is contingent on parents footing part of the bill? This was the question confronting the Upper Tribunal in S-MR V Carmarthenshire CC  UKUT 294 (AAC).
Parents preferred a school with associated £8,752 transport costs and £10,347 in fees. The LA refused citing the inefficient use of resources exemption. A local school was available. The parents countered they would meet the transport costs. The LA objected stating that this would remain voluntary; if the parents withdrew transport, the LA would have a statutory duty to provide transportation due to the school having been named in the statement (EHCP).
The UT Held
The solution is to name two schools – a primary placement contingent on parents providing transportation, and a secondary placement in the alternative. In doing so the UT confirmed a number of old cases from the Court of Appeal and High Court.
Read the full judgement here:  UKUT 294 (AAC).