Education

The Supreme Court ruled that the correct interpretation of the word “regularly” in s 444(1) of the Education Act 1996 meant “in accordance with the rules prescribed by the school”. The case had concerned a father who had been prosecuted for taking his daughter out of school for seven school days, without the school’s permission and the subsequent ruling by the magistrates’ court of no case to answer. Having decided on the correct interpretation of “regularly” the case would be returned to the magistrates with a direction to proceed as if the father’s submission of no case to answer had been rejected.