Key Facts
- •Appeal against Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) decision to include appellant on the Adults Barred List.
- •Allegation: Appellant hit an 86-year-old vulnerable adult (PR) three times on the leg on March 13, 2023.
- •Sole witness for the allegation: SP, a care home staff member who had a difficult relationship with the appellant.
- •Appellant consistently denied the allegations.
- •Bruising appeared on PR's leg the evening after the alleged incident.
- •No medical evidence definitively linked the bruising to the alleged assault.
- •DBS did not call SP to give evidence at the hearing.
Legal Principles
Appeal against a DBS decision is permissible only on grounds of mistake of law or fact in the DBS's findings (Section 4, Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006).
Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006, Section 4
The Tribunal must consider whether the DBS decision involved a material mistake of fact.
Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006, Section 4
Rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 allows for anonymity orders to protect individuals' identities.
Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, Rule 14
Outcomes
Appeal allowed.
The Upper Tribunal found that the DBS made a material mistake of fact in concluding that the appellant assaulted PR. The evidence from SP was considered unreliable due to the lack of corroboration, the difficult relationship between SP and the appellant, and the plausible alternative explanations for the bruising.
Appellant removed from the Adults Barred List.
The Tribunal's finding of a material mistake of fact in the DBS decision necessitates the removal of the appellant from the list.