Collective worship meaning

In this issue: Education Social care Public procurement Planning Governance Children's social care Pensions Social housing Healthcare Licensing Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Education Supreme Court holds that statutory religious education and collective worship in Northern Ireland school breached human rights (JR87 and another for Judicial Review (Appellant)) In In the matter of an application by JR87 and another for Judicial Review (Appellant), the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the appeal advanced by a schoolgirl, JR87, together with her father, against the Department of Education (Northern Ireland). The court determined that delivering religious education and conducting collective worship in Northern Ireland’s controlled schools, as required by the current statutory scheme, violated their rights under Article 2 of Protocol 1 (A2P1) to the European Convention on Human Rights, when read in conjunction with Article 9 ECHR. Victoria Dennis, Educational Law Solicitor at Doyle Clayton, has offered observations on the...

What are the practical implications of the case? As the Supreme Court recognised, the most immediate and concrete consequences of this ruling will be experienced in Northern Ireland, where both government and educators will have to review how religious teaching and worship are delivered in practice, and the practical workability and accessibility of opt‑outs, so as to secure compliance with A2P1. Looking more widely, the Court’s judgment—particularly its endorsement of the European Court of Human Rights’ ruling in Folgerø v Norway (2007) 46 EHRR 47 (not reported by Lexis+® UK)—makes clear that merely providing opt‑outs from specified religious education or school practices will, taken alone, seldom avert a breach of A2P1 if those religious components of the curriculum are not communicated to pupils in an objective, critical and pluralistic way. What was the background? The case concerned JR87, a child enrolled at a controlled, grant‑aided primary school in Belfast. Whilst attending the school, JR87 participated in Christian religious education and in collective worship in accordance...

In this issue: Children's social care Public procurement Social housing Governance Education Social care Healthcare Environmental law and climate change LexTalk®Local Government: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Children's social care Family court judges’ anonymisation reversed by Court of Appeal (Tickle & Summers v BBC and others) Media coverage remains dominated by the killing of ten-year-old Sara Sharif by her father and step-mother. In its aftermath, reporters Louise Tickle and Hannah Summers, alongside leading news organisations, sought the release of documents and information from historic Children Act 1989 proceedings about Sara and her siblings, including the identities of the judges. Although none of those judges had applied for anonymity, Mr Justice Williams nevertheless inserted into his disclosure order a restriction preventing publication of their names. Appeals from Williams J’s ruling succeeded on all three grounds advanced: he lacked jurisdiction to anonymise the judges, and there were...

Note: Although the Academies Act 2010 (AcA 2010) extends to Wales, the provisions enabling the establishment of new academies or free schools are confined to England. Therefore, this Practice Note relates solely to England. One much‑touted benefit of an academy or free school, when compared with a maintained school, is a degree of autonomy in setting the curriculum. That freedom is not absolute, naturally, yet it is greater by comparison. That relativity remains worth remembering here. The curriculum generally AcA 2010, s 1A(1)(b) (as amended) obliges an academy or free school to meet the requirements in section 78 of the Education Act 2002 (EA 2002) (which would otherwise bite only on maintained schools): namely, a balanced and broadly based programme of study that fosters the spiritual, moral, cultural, mental and physical development of pupils at the school and of society, and prepares pupils at the school for the opportunities, responsibilities and experiences of later life. The Model Funding Agreement for free schools typically adds a non‑statutory obligation...

Collecting societies This Practice Note explores collecting societies-often described as licensing bodies and/or Collective Management Organisations (CMOs)-and also considers Independent Management Entities (IMEs). It covers collective licensing, the legal and organisational status of a collecting society, an outline of UK societies, the benefits for copyright owners, disadvantages for right holders and users, the pros and cons for licensees, legal constraints on how societies operate, regulation of collecting societies, and the Collective Management of Copyright (EU Directive) Regulations 2016, SI 2016/221, also referred to as the Collective Rights Management Regulations or the CRM Regulations. These frameworks give right holders a collective route to licence and enforce their IP where individual permissions and monitoring would be impractical. Although several societies may function within the same creative field (such as music), separate bodies will generally represent different categories of right holders. In essence, a collecting society will: offer membership to owners of the relevant rights within its sector licence and enforce those rights for all of...

The Basic Curriculum in England In England, the Basic Curriculum consists of three components: religious education sex education the National Curriculum Collective worship Each school day—though not always at the outset—pupils in maintained schools, including special schools, should take part in collective worship, either as a whole or in groups by age or school, and this is to happen on the school premises. On special occasions, the governing body, following consultation with the headteacher, may arrange for it to be held elsewhere...