AC-2024-LON-001202 and AC-2024-LON-001207 - [2025] EWHC 2810 (Admin)

Fecha: 31-Oct-2025

The regulatory scheme in relation to allegations of teacher misconduct

The regulatory scheme in relation to allegations of teacher misconduct

12.

Section 141B(1)-(2) of the Education Act 2002 (“EA 2002”) provides that the SSE may investigate a case: “(1) … where an allegation is referred to the [SSE] that a person to whom this section applies – (a) may be guilty of unacceptable professional conduct or conduct that may bring the teaching profession into disrepute, or (b) has been convicted (at any time) of a relevant offence. (2) Where the [SSE] finds on an investigation of a case under subsection (1) that there is a case to answer, the [SSE] must decide whether to make a prohibition order in respect of the person.”

13.

“Relevant offence” is defined at s.141B(4) as, in the case of a conviction in England and Wales, a criminal offence other than one having no material relevance to the person’s fitness to be a teacher.

14.

A ‘prohibition order’ means an order prohibiting the person to whom it relates from carrying out teaching work (s.141B(4)) for life, subject to any successful application for a review under Regulation 16 of the Teachers’ Disciplinary (England) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/560) (“the 2012 Regulations”). So far as the 2012 Regulations are concerned:

Regulation 4 provides that any decision made under the regulations may take into account any failure by a teacher to comply with the personal and professional conduct standards set out in part two of “Teachers’ Standards Guidance for school leaders, school staff and governing bodies” (“the Teachers’ Standards”) published by the Secretary of State in July 2011.

ii)

Regulation 5 provides that, where the Secretary of State considers that a teacher has been convicted of a relevant offence the Secretary of State must consider all relevant material (including representations from the teacher) and decide whether to discontinue the matter or refer it to a professional conduct panel.

iii)

Regulation 7 provides the professional conduct panel must consider cases referred to it by the Secretary of State under Regulation 5. Regulation 7(3) provides that the professional conduct panel may determine a case without a hearing at the written request of the teacher who is the subject of the case (as happened here). Where it finds the teacher to have been convicted of a relevant offence, the panel must make a recommendation to the Secretary of State as to whether a prohibition order should be made (Regulation 7(5)).

iv)

Regulation 8(1)-(3) provides that “(1) The Secretary of State must consider any recommendation made by a professional conduct panel before deciding whether to make a prohibition order. (2) Where the Secretary of State decides to make a prohibition order, the Secretary of State must decide - (a) whether an application may be made for a review of the order under regulation 16; and (b) if the Secretary of State decides such an application may be made, the minimum period before the end of which no such application may be made. (3) The minimum period under paragraph (2) must not be less than two years from the date on which the prohibition order takes effect.”

Reviews are dealt with in Regulation 16 which provides “(1) Subject to regulation 8(2), a teacher in relation to whom a prohibition order has been made may apply to the Secretary of State for the order to be set aside. (2) An application under paragraph (1) must be made in writing and must specify the grounds upon which it is made. (3) The Secretary of State may require any person to produce documents or other material evidence for the purposes of an application under paragraph (1). (4) The Secretary of State must decide whether the application should be— (a) allowed; or (b) referred to a professional conduct panel for a recommendation as to whether it should be allowed.”

15.

The teaching profession in England is regulated by the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”), an executive agency which acts on behalf of the SSE. When it receives allegations of misconduct by a teacher, it is responsible for investigating those complaints and ensuring appropriate actions are taken. The regulatory system operated by the TSA is set out in the 2012 Regulations; the TRA’s “Teacher Misconduct: Disciplinary Procedures for the Teaching Profession”; the Teachers’ Standards; and “Teacher misconduct: the prohibition of teachers: Advice on factors relating to decisions leading to the prohibition of teachers from the teaching profession” (2022) (“the Guidance”). At p.8 of the Guidance, the SSE explains that “…the panel will accept the certificate of conviction as conclusive proof of both the conviction and the facts necessarily implied by the conviction, unless exceptional circumstances apply”.

16.

It will be apparent that both a professional conduct panel (“PCP”) established by the TRA, and the SSE, have roles in the procedures for addressing teacher misconduct. In Wallace v SSE [2017] PTSR 675, [50]-[56], [65]-[66], Holgate J summarised the decision making process, and the way in which the statutory scheme splits the decision-making into two tiers:

The PCP (and only the PCP, not the Secretary of State) decides whether the allegations are proved. The Secretary of State has no power to remove or change the PCP’s findings.

ii)

If the PCP finds that one or more allegations are made out, it decides whether to recommend a prohibition order and on what terms.

iii)

The Secretary of State will consider the PCP’s recommendation, but the decision as to whether to make a prohibition order and on what terms is for the Secretary of State alone. The PCP’s reasoning is not in any way binding on the Secretary of State.

iv)

The Secretary of State may disagree with factual conclusions drawn by the PCP for the purpose of making its recommendations as to a prohibition order (but not its fact findings as to whether the relevant allegations are proved).

This structure allows the Secretary of State to exercise an oversight function and ensure consistency in approach.