THE upholding of a decision to permanently exclude a pupil from a Leytonstone school did not contravene the European Convention of Human Rights, a judge has decided.

The pupil, identifed only as V, was excluded from Tom Hood School, in Terling Close, following a fight with another pupil. The decision was upheld by an independent appeal panel in July 2007.

V's mother asked for a judicial review of the decision, on the grounds that the standard of proof used in establishing the facts had been "the balance of probabilities" and not "beyond reasonable doubt", which is a higher standard and used in criminal trials to ensure a fair hearing.

Mr David Wolfe, representing the pupil, argued that the panel's decision therefore did not constitute a fair trial under article 6 of the ECHR.

But Justice Silber refused the judicial review.

The High Court ruling, published today, said: "The decision of the panel to confirm his permanent exclusion did not undermine, let alone significantly affect any rights or alleged rights which he might have."

The ruling added that the proceedings before the appeal panel were not classified as criminal under domestic law.

Therefore, the governors used the "balance of probabilities" standard of proof as set out in education regulations, although the seriousness of the matter had been complicated by conflicting evidence that V had produced a knife during the fight.