The judgment for this case (expertly live-tweeted 3 weeks ago by @GeorgeJulian) didn't go the claimants' way. You can read the full judgment here - https://www.scomo.com/images/r_shaw_and_abc_v_sse_approved_judgment.pdf https://twitter.com/polly_sweeney/status/1294286642438721543

I'm the wrong person to ask about the merits of the judgment, but its description of facts contains some interesting insights into how central & local government handle SEND in time of crisis, so I'll reproduce some of it in this thread. Do read the whole thing for context tho

24 Mar, one day after lockdown: DfE Minister sends out an open letter to SEND stakeholders, giving warning that the Coronavirus Bill will contain power to relax some SEND statutory duties - https://councilfordisabledchildren.org.uk/sites/default/files/field/attachemnt/Minister%20Ford%27s%20open%20letter%20to%20the%20SEND%20sector.pdf

@NNPCF respond the same day, with 9 recommendations & observations and 26 detailed questions

Their response is here: most of the NNPCF's concerns were subsequently borne out by post-lockdown @SpcialNdsJungle & @DCPcampaign survey evidence in June http://www.nnpcf.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Covid-19-NNPCF-Comments-Questions-update-20200324-002.pdf

25 Mar: Coronavirus Bill becomes law. The following day, @ChildrensComm weighs in with concern about the impact of SEND relaxation

From here on in, the detail gets patchier.

30 Mar: DfE briefs @NNPCF & @CDC_tweets . No minutes.

Judge has to piece events together from emails "so heavily - and inappropriately, in my view - redacted that it is a difficult and slow process to make sense of them"

3 Apr: @IPSEAcharity warn DfE that LAs are already telling parents that they won't be complying with their SEND statutory duties (several weeks before relaxations kick in)

You can find examples here: https://twitter.com/CaptainK77/status/1288509566230069249?s=20

The same day: DfE meet with LA children's services bigwigs from ADCS & LGA.

This meeting - a pivotal meeting for SEND decision-making under lockdown - was not minuted. Judge has to piece context together from other documents and statements, but clear that LAs want relaxation...

...and some want SEND duties shit-canned entirely: 8 Apr letter from East Midlands LAs complains that "the void around SEND becomes more obvious everyday"

By void, they don't mean their inability to deliver for kids. They're talking about their potential exposure to legal action

The DfE spends the next few weeks finding out what LAs think, via structured phone calls. 127 LAs contacted, no detailed minutes, summaries submitted for only 88.

I've seen a couple of these summaries. God help the DfE if that's what they're relying on for local intelligence

Just 2 days into this intelligence-gathering exercise, a DfE civil servant submits to the Minister in order to exercise the power to relax SEND duties. Refers (again) to LA concerns about threats of JR, but no actual evidence of it.

Only part of the submission's reasoning is here, but it boils down to this:

"the relevant duties would not be performed whether or not the law continued to require them to be performed"

They wanted post-draft endorsement from ADCS & NNPCF. An interesting take on co-production

Mid-April: More LAs lobby for complete disapplication of s42 (DfE didn't indulge them), draft relaxation guidance goes round the usual stakeholders

New MinSub to bring the SEND relaxations into force: contains recommended justifications & a 'strategy to "control the narrative"' , including “reactive handling”of concerns of parents that their children are “no longer getting the support they need”

The red mist is descending, so I'll stop. It was a crisis, for sure, but the narrative supports a conclusion that the first priority of system leaders was to support the system, & not to support the people it's supposed to serve. Much like the currently-blazing exam shitshow