JHB v The Disclosure and Barring Service
[2024] UKUT 367 (AAC)
HA v Disclosure and Barring Service
11 September 2024
[2024] UKUT 277 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal
A care worker was accused of sexually abusing a vulnerable resident. The DBS banned him from working with vulnerable adults. He appealed, but the judge decided the evidence showed he was guilty. The ban stays in place.
Key Facts
- •HA, a rehabilitation support worker, was included in the adults' barred list by the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS).
- •The DBS found that HA had engaged in sexual conduct with a vulnerable adult resident (AR), including anal touching and attempted sex.
- •HA also engaged in unprofessional conversations with AR about his personal life and failed to report inappropriate behavior from AR.
- •HA appealed the DBS decision, arguing that the factual findings were wrong and that the evidence against him was fabricated.
- •The Upper Tribunal heard oral evidence from HA, two of his witnesses, and reviewed extensive documentary evidence.
- •The Tribunal considered conflicting evidence regarding the sexual intimacy between HA and AR.
Legal Principles
The Upper Tribunal can only overturn a DBS decision if the DBS made a mistake on a point of law or in a finding of fact.
Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006, Section 4(2)
The decision of whether it is appropriate to include an individual in a barred list is not a question of law or fact.
Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006, Section 4(3)
Relevant conduct includes conduct of a sexual nature involving a vulnerable adult if it appears inappropriate; conduct endangering or likely to endanger a vulnerable adult.
Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006, Schedule 3, paragraph 9 and 10
Outcomes
The appeal was dismissed.
The Upper Tribunal found that the DBS did not make a mistake in its factual findings. The Tribunal found AR's account of sexual intimacy credible and reliable, despite HA's arguments to the contrary.