VM v Disclosure and Barring Service
[2024] UKUT 220 (AAC)
RR v Disclosure and Barring Service
12 June 2024
[2024] UKUT 171 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal
A teacher (RR) was accused of inappropriate behaviour towards a student (KK). The initial investigation was rushed and unclear. A judge reviewed the case and found flaws in the initial investigation. The case will be re-investigated, and until then, the teacher remains under investigation.
Key Facts
- •RR, an Afghan national, was accused of causing emotional harm to a 16-year-old student (KK) during a summer English language course.
- •The alleged incidents involved inappropriate comments about KK's appearance, asking her to be his girlfriend, and persistently requesting her phone number.
- •RR's disciplinary hearing was short and lacked detailed information about the allegations.
- •The Upper Tribunal reviewed the evidence, including KK's statement and RR's testimony.
- •The Tribunal found inconsistencies and lack of clarity in the original DBS findings and hearing.
Legal Principles
An individual included in a barred list may appeal to the Upper Tribunal against a decision under the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 (SVGA).
Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 (SVGA), section 4
The Upper Tribunal has the power to make findings of fact and remit the matter to DBS for a new decision if it finds that DBS has made a mistake of law or fact.
SVGA, section 4(6)(b) and (7)
The Upper Tribunal's decision must be based on the balance of probabilities.
Implicit in the Tribunal's reasoning and decision-making process.
Outcomes
The Upper Tribunal found that the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) made mistakes in its findings of fact.
The Tribunal found inconsistencies and lack of clarity in the original DBS findings and hearing. They found RR's account more plausible after hearing his evidence and considering the context of the short, unplanned disciplinary hearing.
The matter was remitted to DBS for a new decision.
The Tribunal made its own findings of fact, differing from and providing context for DBS's original findings. This necessitated a new decision by DBS.
RR is to remain in the lists until DBS makes its new decision.
This is a direction under SVGA section 4(7)(b).