TM v The Disclosure and Barring Service
[2024] UKUT 88 (AAC)
JHB v The Disclosure and Barring Service
18 November 2024
[2024] UKUT 367 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal
A man was barred from working with children and vulnerable adults due to a past conviction and additional allegations. He appealed, arguing mistakes were made. The court said the appeal only looked for clear mistakes of fact or law, not whether barring him was fair. After reviewing all evidence, including the man's testimony, the court decided there weren't any major mistakes and upheld the barring decision.
Key Facts
- •Appeal against the Disclosure and Barring Service's (DBS) decision to retain the Appellant's name on the Children's Barred List and include it on the Adults' Barred List.
- •Appellant, Mr. B, was convicted in 2007 of sexual activity with a female child under 16.
- •DBS considered the 2007 conviction and three further allegations of harmful sexual behaviour.
- •DBS found the three allegations proven on the balance of probabilities.
- •Appellant challenged the DBS decision, claiming mistakes of fact and law.
- •The appeal involved a previous Upper Tribunal decision that was overturned by the Court of Appeal, leading to a rehearing.
- •The Upper Tribunal considered new oral evidence from the Appellant.
Legal Principles
Appeals against DBS barring decisions are limited to mistakes of fact or law. The appropriateness of barring is not appealable.
Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006, section 4(2) and (3)
A mistake of fact can be an incorrect, incomplete finding, or omission; the Upper Tribunal assesses the evidence as a whole, including the appellant's evidence reliability; appropriateness of barring is exclusively for the DBS.
PF v DBS [2020] UKUT 256 (AAC)
If the Upper Tribunal has the same material as the DBS, it shouldn't overturn findings unless irrational or lacking evidence. However, oral evidence before the Upper Tribunal, even if repeating written accounts, allows for assessment of evidence quality and can lead to appeal allowance.
DBS v RI [2024] EWCA Civ 95
An appellant can contend before the Upper Tribunal that the DBS was mistaken in finding they committed the relevant act; the Upper Tribunal can evaluate evidence and allow appeals if persuaded.
DBS v RI [2024] EWCA Civ 95
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The Upper Tribunal found no material mistake of fact or error of law in the DBS's decision.