Image via Shutterstock
A father who successfully contested a fine for taking his daughter on a school term-time holiday faces a further battle.
But Jonathan Platt, from the Isle of Wight, described his local council’s decision to seek a High Court appeal as “nonsense”.
He had successfully argued the law only required pupils to attend “regularly”.
Isle of Wight Council has now applied to the High Court to provide a clear definition of “regular attendance”.
Platt said he was “looking forward” to the case being heard there, the BBC reported.
His six-year-old daughter’s primary school refused his request to take her on a family holiday to Florida in April.
The council took him to court after he refused to pay a £120 fine.
He won his case last month after he told magistrates that section 44 of the Education Act did not put restrictions on holidays during term time, provided pupils otherwise attended school regularly.
The council said it was “aggrieved” with the court’s ruling that there was therefore no case for Platt to answer.
It has applied to the High Court for an opinion on whether “the unauthorised absence of a child for seven consecutive school days on holiday… amounts to the child failing to attend the school regularly”.
The council claimed Platt’s daughter’s attendance rate of 90.3% after she returned from the holiday was incorrectly calculated by the court.
The local authority also said the school’s holiday request form, which stated satisfactory attendance as being between 90% and 95%, was “an obsolete version”.
Platt said: “I’m really looking forward to this being considered by the High Court because I am convinced that this nonsense of fining parents who take kids on holiday in term time, but otherwise have perfect attendance, is coming to an end with that judgment.”