Private school families lose legal challenge against Labour VAT raid
Three separate challenges were heard together in a judicial review between April 1 and 3, using more than a dozen families as case studies.
In a single written judgement issued on Friday, the three judges presiding over the case said they 'dismiss the claims'.
Dame Victoria Sharp, Lord Justice Newey and Mr Justice Chamberlain said the VAT policy was 'proportionate' in its aim to raise extra revenue for state schools.
Private school families sued the Government over its decision to apply 20 per cent VAT to fees, which came into force in January.
Parent groups were seeking a 'declaration of incompatibility' under human rights laws. Even if successful, this would not have overturned the VAT policy in itself, but could have forced the Government to take a second look at the tax raid or hand out exemptions.
The Independent Schools Council (ISC), which represents more than 1,400 private schools, hired Lord Pannick KC, the leading human rights barrister, to spearhead its legal challenge.
The case was wrapped together with two others, using children as case studies to highlight the alleged unfairness of the policy. They included children with special education needs (SEND) who are not eligible for tailored care plans, religious families with children at faith schools, and a girl at a single-sex school.
Claimants argued that the VAT raid interferes with the fundamental right to education for some pupils, and disproportionately affects lower-income families.
Julie Robinson, chief executive of the ISC, said: 'This is an unprecedented tax on education and it was right that its compatibility with human rights law was tested.
'We would like to thank the claimants who shared their stories on key issues: SEND, faith schools, bilingual provision and girls-only education. It showcased how vital independent schools are for many families and the broad, diverse community choosing what they feel is the right education for their child.
'The ISC is carefully considering the court's judgment and next steps. Our focus remains on supporting schools, families and children. We will continue to work to ensure the government is held to account over the negative impact this tax on education is having across independent and state schools.'
More follows.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Street preacher who lost Spectator libel case to challenge High Court ruling
An Islamic street preacher who lost a High Court libel case against The Spectator and the magazine's associate editor has said he will be appealing against the decision. Mohammed Hegab, known online as Mohammed Hijab, sued the publication and Douglas Murray over an article that alleged he was a 'street agitator' who whipped up his followers and made disparaging comments about Hindus in the wake of the 2022 Leicester riots, which he denied. In a ruling last week, Mr Justice Johnson found that the article from September 2022 was 'defamatory' at common law, but dismissed the claim. He said: 'The publication has not caused, and is not now likely to cause, serious harm to the claimant's reputation. 'In any event, it is substantially true, and it is not materially inaccurate.' The judge also found that, as a witness, Mr Hegab was 'combative and constantly argumentative'. In his written judgment, he said: 'He sought, at every turn, to debate with counsel, responding to questions with rhetorical questions of his own, arguing his case rather than giving straightforward responses, and denigrating the character of the second defendant to whom he bears palpable personal animosity. 'I am satisfied that he lied on significant issues, with the consequence that his evidence, overall, is worthless.' In a YouTube video posted on Wednesday, Mr Hegab said he had 'learned a lot' from the process, adding that he would be appealing against the ruling. He said: 'I didn't expect it to go that way. I was very disappointed, very disheartened with the ruling.' He added: 'I will be appealing this judgment.' In the clip, Mr Hegab also accused the judge of being biased, adding that he had made the mistake of 'putting a bit too much trust in the justice systems in the West'. The defamation trial centred around a video Mr Hegab made amid violence between Muslims and Hindus in Leicester in the summer of 2022, which was sparked after India won a cricket match against Pakistan in August that year. In it, he said: 'If they believe in reincarnation … what a humiliation and pathetic thing for them to be reincarnated into some pathetic, weak, cowardly people like that. 'I'd rather be an animal. I'd rather be reincarnated as a grasshopper…' During the trial in London, Mr Hegab claimed it was clear from the context that he was not talking about Hindus, but Hindutva, an extremist far-right ideology. But Mr Justice Johnson said that Mr Hegab 'knew exactly what he was doing' and 'chose his words deliberately'.
The Hill
25 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump must not give anything away in Alaska
Many commentators have likened President Trump's meeting with Vladimir Putin in Alaska to the 1938 Munich meeting between Adolf Hitler, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and French Premier Eduard Daladier over the fate of Czechoslovakia. There certainly are similarities. The Munich meeting took place without the presence of Czech President Edvard Benes, and the Alaska summit will not include Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. And there is widespread fear, especially in Europe, that Trump will yield to Putin's demands for Ukrainian territory — both that which his armed forces have already seized in Crimea and the oblasts of Luhansk and Donetsk, and those still held by Ukraine there and in the oblasts of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia. As the Institute for the Study of War points out, should Putin successfully obtain control of all four oblasts — and especially all of Donetsk, which contains what the Institute terms Ukraine's 'fortress belt' — he would control several potential vectors of attack on the remainder of Ukraine. This would enable Russian forces to seize the country, just as Hitler ultimately took all of Czechoslovakia. Yet there are significant differences as well. Hitler was determined to seize the Sudetenland, and ultimately all of Czechoslovakia, without firing a shot. He had already effectively incorporated Austria that way in the 1936 Anschluss. And he succeeded in doing so. While Putin also wants to be handed over territories that his forces have not yet occupied without having to fight for them — in this regard following Hitler's precedent — he faces a very different set of circumstances. Russian forces have been fighting a determined Ukrainian military since February 2022. Moreover, despite ceaseless and heavy bombardment of Ukrainian formations and military infrastructure, coupled with terror attacks on cities and civilian institutions, Russia has gained remarkably little territory over the past three years of intense combat. Furthermore, just as Putin mistakenly thought that a Spetsnaz (special forces) attack on Kyiv at the start of the war would decapitate the Ukrainian leadership and install a pliant pro-Russian regimen, he also appears to have erroneously thought that Russian-speaking Ukrainians, many of them in the four provinces he seeks to annex, would also take Moscow's side. Yet Russia's attacks have actually united most of Ukraine's population, most notably those selfsame Russian speakers who once held positive attitudes toward Moscow. For its part, Ukraine not only has limited Russian advances in over three years of war, it has inflicted severe damage to Russia's military infrastructure, hit targets deep inside Russia including Moscow and has killed or wounded hundreds of thousands of Russian soldiers and North Korean personnel. Still another difference relates to Ukraine's neighbors and partners. Whereas the leading European powers in 1938 hastily acquiesced to Hitler's demands, France, Germany, Britain, the Nordic and Baltic states and the European Union have all made it clear that they stand by Kyiv's determination to preserve its territorial integrity and that Ukraine must have a seat at any table that would determine its future. In addition, NATO has not closed the door on the prospect, however remote, of Ukrainian accession; Putin wants that door shut tight and permanently. That Trump has spoken of concessions in the form of land swaps, while Putin has never indicated anything like an exchange of territory, has deepened European concerns that a deal would legitimate a Russian land grab. It also worries Europeans that Trump is so eager to achieve an agreement, regardless of how its terms affect Ukraine, because he covets the Nobel Peace Prize. The prize is awarded by the Norwegian Nobel Committee, whose members are appointed by the Norwegian parliament; since Norwegians generally view Trump unfavorably, it is highly unlikely that the Committee would ever award him the prize. Hitler interpreted Daladier and Chamberlain's willingness to fold at Munich as a signal that he would not encounter British opposition to either his seizure of all of Czechoslovakia or his planned attack on Poland. He viewed both men as 'poor worms,' and Nazi documents released subsequent to World War II reveal that Hitler viewed Chamberlain as so weak that he worried that British prime minister would preemptively give away Poland, thereby robbing Germany of the ability to seize the country by force. Trump needs to demonstrate to Putin when they meet in Alaska that he is no Neville Chamberlain. He must avoid any giveaway to the Russian dictator, which would only whet Putin's clearly insatiable appetite for more conquests, be they remainder of Ukraine, neutral Moldova or one of NATO's Baltic members. As Hitler sought 'lebensraum' — 'living space' for Germans — Putin seeks to restore the Czarist Empire. Whatever the term, the objective was and is the same: territorial expansion. It took a global war to stop Hitler. Hopefully, a strong-willed Trump will obviate the prospect of another devastating conflict. Dov S. Zakheim is a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and vice chairman of the board for the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He was undersecretary of Defense (comptroller) and chief financial officer for the Department of Defense from 2001 to 2004 and a deputy undersecretary of Defense from 1985 to 1987.
Forbes
27 minutes ago
- Forbes
Guyana Government Locks In An Innovative Energy Security Solution
In the wake of last week's announcement by ExxonMobil of the commencement of production from a fourth major oil development in the Stabroek area offshore Guyana, the size of the revenue stream due to the country's government and it's 800,000 citizens now stands to rise to as high as $10 billion annually by 2030. The magnitude of such a bounty is undeniable, but with the rapid rise in national wealth comes a responsibility to manage it in a way which maximizes the benefits to the nation. An Innovative Solution Brings an Array of Potential Benefits The government led by President Irfaan Ali has proven to be nimble and open to innovative ideas and solutions as the revenue stream has grown, always with an eye towards maximizing the opportunity to the benefit of Guyana and the region. One such solution the government announced recently is an arrangement with U.S. energy logistics and infrastructure provider Curlew Midstream which will avoid the need to invest in a new domestic oil refinery. Chevron recently became an ExxonMobil partner in the Stabroek field via its $53 billion acquisition of Houston-based independent Hess Corp. In the arrangement, announced by President Ali in February's Guyana Energy Conference and Supply Chain Expo, the government plans to trade its share of the Stabroek crude production with Curlew in exchange for the refined products needed to power the Guyanese economy. Curlew will transport the crude oil to the U.S. and supply corresponding volumes of products like gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, lubricants and many other refined products back to Guyana. Telling the Expo's audience that he believes the new arrangement will have a 'transformative impact' on Guyana's economy, President Ali added, 'It is a strategic investment that goes beyond commercial relationship…These are the types of investments that we are pursuing: Transformative investments. Investments that go beyond economics and financial returns. Investments to strengthen security, integrate security, expand partnership.' Importantly, the U.S. Department of Commerce (USDoC) praised the plan following Ali's announcement. On its X feed, the USDoC said the project is 'a major win for the U.S. & Guyanese economies. This project shows the tremendous work for greater commercial ties & stability for the CARICOM region. We look forward to the completion of the agreement!' Headquartered in Bentonville, Arkansas, Curlew Midstream operates an array of storage, pipelines, and other associated infrastructure which gives it the ability to source the refined products needed from a variety of Gulf Coast refineries and plants. In a recent interview, Curlew's Founder and CEO, Aaron Grieb, told me, 'We have pipeline connectivity from our facility in Venice, Louisiana, to the entire New Orleans refining network. We also have the ability to barge products from any of those refineries.' Further east, Grieb adds that the company also has pipeline connections to Chevron's largest domestic refinery at Pascagoula, LA. By entering this arrangement with Curlew, Guyana stands to not only be able to supply its domestic energy needs at a potential savings as high as 20% below current prices, but also to profit from the export of excess supplies to the greater Southern Caribbean region, and even into Brazil. As a member of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) alliance, Guyana stands to potentially become the 'gas station' for the region, with an ability to offer gas and other products at prices below the current market. Such positioning could give the Ali government and his successors more influence in the region and open up additional opportunities for beneficial trade arrangements. A new wealth in refined products, combined with a new highway currently under construction linking the southern half of Guyana with the remote northern Brazilian province of Roraima opens up more new trade opportunities. Currently, Roraima and its capital city, Boa Vista, must obtain gasoline and other fuel needs via barges shipped hundreds of miles up the Amazon River. An ability to get the products overland from Guyana's capital, Georgetown, will cut weeks and substantial costs out of that supply chain. Curlew is already in the process of establishing a loading and storage terminal directly adjacent to ExxonMobil's own port facility, the only port in the area with the ability to handle the largest class refined product vessels. The location is a key element to the project's success. 'We're going to go right next to them [ExxonMobil] to help justify the unit economics of being able to bring bigger ships into Guyana,' Grieb says. 'We thought it was important to have a working relationship with Exxon, because they also stand to benefit from a lot of the efforts that we're doing in country. It really is a complimentary relationship.' For Ali's government, the ability to exploit the country's equity production to source its energy needs without having to invest in a new refinery brings an array of economic and environmental benefits. Building a refinery from scratch would involve the need to secure billions of dollars in investment and consume at least 7-10 years before operations could begin. Even with the most modern technologies available, refining operations come with an array of environmental concerns including potential impacts to both water and air quality. The trading arrangement with Curlew enables Guyana to satisfy its refined products needs while avoiding such complex business involvements and environmental concerns. From Grieb's point of view, it does more than that. 'It strengthens bilateral trade between the U.S. and Guyana,' he points out. 'It creates job security for Guyanese citizens. It creates an array of new industry that doesn't exist today, and it creates additional bi-lateral trade, security and geopolitical benefits between the U.S., Guyana and CARICOM nations.' For Guyana, Responsible Management Is Crucial Curlew and Guyana's government have engaged in negotiations since February's announcement and anticipate having a final deal in place in early September. Once final, it will represent the second largest commercial deal in Guyana's history, behind only its agreement with ExxonMobil governing the Stabroek development. Once this innovative solution to a highly complex need is operational, Guyana stands to enjoy a level of optionality and flexibility related to its energy security needs which no other country in the region currently has, providing a clear example of responsible management of a key national asset.
