![[2025] UKUT 17 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
Conclusions
Disposal
Having decided that the DBS decision does not involve any material mistake of fact or error of law, there can only be one outcome to this appeal. This is because section 4(5) of the 2006 Act states as follows:
Unless the Upper Tribunal finds that has made a mistake of law or fact, it must confirm the decision of DBS. That being so, we confirm the DBS’s decision to include the Appellant on the Children’s Barred List.
J Heggie
Specialist Member of the Upper Tribunal
S Jacoby
Specialist Member of the Upper Tribunal
Authorised for issue on 7th January 2024
- Heading
- A summary of the Upper Tribunal’s decision
- Introductory matters
- The statutory framework
- The appeal provisions
- The guidance in the case law
- Mistakes of law
- The DBS’s barring decision
- A brief summary of the factual background to the appeal
- The grounds of appeal and the parties' submissions
- The oral hearing of the substantive appeal
- JA’s oral evidence at hearing
- Our assessment of the appellant’s evidence and findings of fact
- Other grounds of appeal relating to first finding of relevant conduct
- T he indecent image: second finding of relevant conduct
- Materiality
- Proportionality
- 49.These four questions were later developed by Lord Sumption in Bank Mellat [2013] UKSC 39 at 20
- 50.In assessing proportionality, the Upper Tribunal has ‘…to give appropriate weight to the decision of a body charged by statute with a task of expert evaluation’ (see Independent Safeguarding Author
- Conclusions