The Constitutional Court has ruled that Pridwin Preparatory School’s decision to terminate the contract with the parents of two children following a dispute was constitutionally invalid.
The parents approached the Constitutional Court after the High Court dismissed their case in 2017. The Supreme Court of Appeal also dismissed their appeal in 2018.
The Constitutional Court says Pridwin Preparatory School’s decision did not take into account what was in the best interest of the learners and sought to exclude them because it relied on a provision in their contract with the parents.
The contract allowed the school to terminate the contract “for any reason”.
Justice Leona Theron says although the children are now at a different school, the case remains relevant as it also affects other independent schools.
“Pridwin has not demonstrated that there was appropriate justification, for summarily limiting a right to a basic education enjoyed by the two children. The judgment concludes the decision to terminate the parents’ contracts, absent the provision of an opportunity to make representations on the best interest of the children, is constitutionally invalid.”
‘Children’s right to education should be protected’
Justice Theron says once a school signs a contract with a parent, it is obliged to ensure that the child’s right to education is protected. She adds that in the event of an expulsion, the school must make sure that there’s substantive and procedural fairness, including a hearing.
“The 4th judgment finds that removing a child from their school is a major, life-changing event for a child, and therefore, the child should be afforded the opportunity to have their views and wishes given due consideration. Thus it concludes that Pridwin had the obligation to consider the rights of the applicants’ children, to have their views heard on the matter and to afford this opportunity to them either in person or through a representative.”
‘No contract is above the Constitution’
Equal Education has described the judgment as a positive victory, saying it protects the right to basic education for learners.
“Our concern was also for learners from poor backgrounds, and working-class communities who then get into contracts with private schools, and mushrooming schools, which they had no representation or any form of defense to defend their right to basic education. We think from now on private schools will realise that we’re dealing with a social right, and no contract of a private school is above the constitution of the country, and all the learners have a right to make sure they receive that right,” says Head of Organising for Equal Education in Gauteng Zamo Mthunzi.
