PQ v The Disclosure and Barring Service
[2024] UKUT 161 (AAC)
XYZ v DBS
19 March 2024
[2024] UKUT 85 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal
A teacher was accused of having an inappropriate relationship with a student. The DBS banned him from working with children. He argued the ban was wrong because another organization investigated the same situation and let him off. The court decided the DBS was right, even though their investigation was shorter and didn't have a hearing, because the evidence supported their decision.
Key Facts
- •XYZ, a PE teacher, allegedly formed an inappropriate relationship with a 16-year-old student (Pupil A), including giving lifts, Snapchat communication, and kissing.
- •Pupil A's father reported the relationship after witnessing her get into XYZ's car.
- •Police took no further action due to Pupil A's reluctance to formally state her case.
- •XYZ was dismissed from his job and referred to the DBS and TRA.
- •The DBS barred XYZ from working with children.
- •The TRA panel found XYZ's conduct inappropriate but not serious enough for disciplinary action.
- •XYZ appealed the DBS decision to the Upper Tribunal.
Legal Principles
Anonymity orders can be granted to protect vulnerable individuals and prevent jigsaw identification.
UKUT-AAC 2024/85
The Upper Tribunal's jurisdiction in barring decisions is limited to mistakes of fact or law; the appropriateness of the barring decision itself is not reviewable.
Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 (SVGA)
A mistake of fact can be an incorrect, incomplete finding, or an omission, including states of mind.
PF v DBS [2020] UKUT 256 (AAC)
The Upper Tribunal can consider new evidence to determine if a DBS finding was wrong, even if some evidence supported the original finding.
DBS v JHB [2023] EWCA Civ 982, Kihembo v DBS [2023] EWCA Civ 1547, DBS v RI [2024] EWCA Civ 95
Findings of fact by other bodies (like the TRA) are not binding on the DBS.
UKUT-AAC 2024/85
It is not necessarily an abuse of process to make findings inconsistent with prior proceedings.
Greene v Davies [2022] EWCA Civ 414
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The Upper Tribunal found the DBS decision was not based on a material mistake of fact. While acknowledging the TRA's different findings, the Tribunal conducted its own assessment of the evidence and found the DBS's conclusions to be within the range of reasonably available options.