The cost to an academy trust of mounting a legal challenge over a damning Ofsted report has ended up costing it at least £700,000, Tes can reveal.

The Durand Academy Trust says it would rather have spent the legal costs of challenging the Ofsted report - which branded the Durand Academy primary as “inadequate” - on pupils’ education.

The Ofsted report was originally quashed by Judge McKenna in August 2017 who said that Ofsted’s complaints procedure was “unfair” because it did not allow the school to effectively challenge the report.

However, Ofsted took the case to the Court of Appeal, which today ruled that the judge’s decision was wrong and Ofsted’s inspection procedure was “fair and reasonable.”

A spokesman for Durand Academy Trust said today that the legal costs it had incurred were now around £700,000, including a bill of at least £200,000 for Ofsted’s costs in bringing the appeal, and a similar bill for its own costs during the appeal.

He said the figure also included around £300,000 incurred by Durand for the original court case in which it fought the report.

The trust spokesman said: “We believe the report was unfair, and puts the reputation of our teachers at stake.

“It goes without saying that we’d much rather that this public money was being spent in schools.”

Today Ofsted has published the report that the Durand Academy Trust tried to ban.

Following an inspection that took place in late 2016, it states that the south London school, now called Van Gogh Primary, was inadequate on eight out of nine subheadings.

They include effectiveness of leadership and management, quality of teaching, pupil behaviour and welfare, and outcomes for pupils.

An Ofsted spokesperson said: “We have always been confident that our assessment of Durand Academy was accurate, and that the school was treated fairly. Our inspectors do not make their judgments lightly.

“A judgment of special measures is only confirmed after extensive and detailed consideration of the evidence, and lengthy engagement with the school.

“We are very pleased that the Court of Appeal has confirmed that this process is fair and reasonable, and that we are finally able to publish the inspection report.”