Pupils with disabilities: early dismissal deemed discriminatory

A child with a severedisability cannot be systematically forced to leave nursery school before the bell has rung for the other pupils. Reducing the school day, in fact, infringes upon the right to education and inclusion in school for children with disabilities, thereby constituting discrimination. Nor can discrimination be ruled out simply because the decision – in this specific case by a state-recognised private school – to reduce teaching time is due to the insufficient number of support hours allocated. Nor is it relevant that the relevant individualised education plan was not challenged by the pupil’s parents before the administrative court.

The Court of Cassation (judgement 23363/2026) upheld the appeal lodged by the parents of a child with a severe form of autism, who had been forced to leave school before his ‘neurotypical’ peers, because a special needs teacher was not available, without whom managing his needs became difficult. This argument had persuaded the Court of Appeal but not the judges of the Court of Cassation.

According to the Supreme Court, reducing a pupil’s attendance hours due to the school’s organisational needs in accommodating a pupil with a disability may delay, or even jeopardise, their integration ‘by preventing them from taking advantage of the opportunities, in terms of personal development and socialisation, that come from being with others during normal school hours’.

It is the school administration that must adapt its organisation to the individual’s needs, and not the other way round. Failure to do so would infringe the fundamental right – which cannot be curtailed on financial grounds – to education and equality, as enshrined in the Charter and in supranational legislation. As for the support teacher is not a special supervisor of the child, but a bridge between the child and the rest of the class.