Families of children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) remain determined to fight for their children’s support, despite losing a legal challenge against two local authorities.
The high court dismissed a judicial review brought by the three families against Bristol City Council and Devon County Council, concerning the local authorities’ involvement in the government’s safety valve agreements.
These agreements are multi-million-pound financial rescue deals aimed at reducing local authority SEND budget deficits.
The families’ challenge brought public attention to the impact of funding policies on disabled children and how special needs provision is being assessed and implemented nationwide.
Although judge Mr Justice Linden ruled against the claimants, the case raised questions about how local authorities manage rising SEND costs, and whether efforts to balance budgets come at the expense of disabled children’s education and wellbeing.
The judgment also acknowledged the financial pressures on councils, given they must still comply with their statutory obligations, including those relating to education, health and care plans (EHCPs).
Consultation questioned
The case centred on concerns about cuts to SEND services. The claimants argued that the councils had entered into the safety valve agreements without consulting them properly or fully assessing the long-term impact on children.
The families said that the cost-cutting measures risked breaching the councils’ legal duties to provide essential special needs services.
The council’s debt is still increasing despite signing the safety valve agreement and it’s not clear how this is beneficial to disabled children
The legal grounds for the challenge included an allegation that the councils had breached their duty to consult under the Children and Families Act 2014 and the public sector equality duty under the Equality Act 2010.
The families were represented by Watkins Solicitors.
Beverley Watkins, managing partner, said the judgment would not deter efforts to hold decision-makers accountable.
“This case has always been about more than one legal challenge,” she said. “It’s about the real-world consequences of policy decisions on families of children with special educational needs and disabilities.”
Watkins added: “The safety valve agreements are having a significant impact on children’s access to vital support, and we believe those impacts must be subject to greater scrutiny.
“Every day, we speak to parents who are forced to give up work or reduce their hours, who face inappropriate school placements for their children or who must pursue legal action simply to secure basic educational provision.
“This isn’t just about figures in a budget – it’s about children’s lives and futures.
“Although we did not succeed, this case has brought important national attention to the challenges families are facing under the current system.
“We remain committed to holding decision-makers to account and standing with families as they fight for the education and support their children deserve.”
Safety valve detrimental
Commenting via Watkins Solicitors, one parent from Devon, who asked to remain anonymous, said: “We may have lost this battle, but we are still fighting.”
The mother stated families were disappointed but added: “Devon Council’s debt is still increasing despite signing the safety valve agreement and it’s not clear how this is beneficial to disabled children in Devon.
“We will continue to gather any evidence that shows how the safety valve agreement is detrimental to the education of our children.
“We may have lost this battle but we are still fighting for our children’s right to an education.”
Safety valve agreements are having a significant impact on children’s access to vital support
Another parent involved in the Bristol case also voiced their frustration: “I know I’m not alone in feeling deeply disheartened by the direction things are moving for children with SEND.
“Local authorities may still have legal duties on paper but, in practice, families are left fighting for the basics – whether that’s a timely EHCP, the right school placement, or access to essential support.
“In Bristol, delays in EHCPs and the lack of specialist placements are already widespread.
“Programmes like the safety valve don’t appear to be improving the situation – in fact, they risk embedding these failures further.
“Our children deserve better, not just in theory but in the day-to-day reality of their education and support.”
Disability Rights UK argued that the education system is “institutionally and systemically ableist” and that policy and practice prioritise gatekeeping over support.
It added the SEND system lacks accountability, which has enabled and normalised widespread unlawful practice.
Cases
AB, R (On the Application Of) v Bristol City Council [2025] EWHC 893 (Admin).
