Pre-funded places attracting element 1 and 2 funding from ESFA
15th September 2022
![Pre-funded places attracting element 1 and 2 funding from ESFA 1 Jim Hirschman 3PB Barristers e1627400115267 280x335 1](https://www.3pb.co.uk/content/uploads/Jim-Hirschman-3PB-Barristers-e1627400115267-280x335-1.jpg)
3PB's family, education and public law barrister Jim Hirschmann (pictured here) analyses an Upper Tribunal ruling on the approach to be taken to pre-funded places attracting element 1 and 2 funding from ESFA.
Writing for Local Government Lawyer, Jim comments, "The case of PM v Worcestershire County Council [2022] UKUT 53 (AAC) clarifies (1) the approach to be taken to pre-funded places attracting element 1 and 2 funding from ESFA [44]-[51] (2) suggests that new evidence contradicting evidence given by a witness may justify an application to set aside a FTT decision [52]-[59] (3) that a former failure by an education provider to provide EHCP provision may render such a provider unsuitable [60]-[63].id est."
Read the full analysis here.