Facts
The appellant ([A.] ) attended the training programme "Commercial basic education for adults" at the Wirtschaftsschule [B.] , a privately organised school, from the autumn semester 2023/2024. With a decision dated 6 May 2024, he was immediately and without further participation in lessons excluded from the school for repeated breaches of agreements and failure to integrate into the school structures. The appellant lodged an appeal against this exclusion with the Education Directorate of the Canton of Zurich, which, with a decision dated 24 May 2024, did not enter into the matter on the grounds that it was not competent. The reason given was that the training programme was not subject to public law. The appellant appealed this decision of non-entertainment to the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich, 4th Division, which, with a judgment dated 22 August 2024, dismissed the appeal and confirmed the non-entertainment by the Education Directorate. On 2 September 2024, the appellant filed an appeal in public-law matters with the Federal Supreme Court. He requested that the judgment of the lower court be set aside and that the Education Directorate be instructed to entertain his appeal. He also filed an application for free legal aid.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court first examined its jurisdiction and the admissibility requirements of its own motion. It found that the subject matter of the dispute concerns the legality of the Education Directorate’s non-entertainment decision, not the exclusion itself. Since the lower court had reviewed the non-entertainment decision in public-law proceedings, the Federal Supreme Court assessed the appeal under the appeal in public-law matters (Art. 82 lit. a FSCA). The appeal was admissible as no grounds for exclusion under Art. 83 FSCA applied and the exception for the evaluation of examination results (Art. 83 lit. t FSCA) was not applicable.
On the merits, the Federal Supreme Court examined whether the appellant’s exclusion from the training programme was based on public law. It found that neither federal law nor cantonal law contained specific provisions governing admission to and the structure of the training programme "Commercial basic education for adults" in question. Wirtschaftsschule [B.] is a non-cantonal school organised as a private entity pursuant to § 21 VPETA/ZH. The lower court had correctly held that the exclusion was not based on public law, as the programme was structured as a private-law educational offering to prepare for a qualification procedure (Art. 17 para. 5 VPETA). The appellant failed to demonstrate that cantonal provisions governed admission to or the structure of the programme. Moreover, the applicable disciplinary regulations of the Education Directorate were only intended for formalised educational programmes and did not apply to the programme in question.
The Federal Supreme Court noted that the lower court had reasonably distinguished between the regulation of admission to the qualification procedure and the structure of…