Heading

Between:
JA
Appellant
- v -
Disclosure and Barring Service
Respondent
Before: Upper Tribunal Judge E Fitzpatrick
Upper Tribunal Member J Heggie
Upper Tribunal Member S Jacoby
Mode of hearing: Oral (face to face)
Venue: Birmingham Civil and Family Justice Centre
Representation:
Appellant: Ms L Bayley of counsel instructed by Richard Nelson LLP.
Respondent: Mr A Serr of counsel instructed by DLA Piper UK LLP.
RULE 14 Order
Pursuant to rule 14(1) of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, it is prohibited for any person to disclose or publish any matter likely to lead members of the public to identify the Appellant in these proceedings. This order does not apply to: (a) the Appellant; (b) any person to whom the Appellant discloses such a matter or who learns of it through publication by the Appellant; or (c) any person exercising statutory (including judicial) functions where knowledge of the matter is reasonably necessary for the proper exercise of the functions.
SUMMARY OF DECISION
65 Safeguarding vulnerable groups, 65.1 Children’s barred list, 65.9 Finding of fact, 65.10 materiality.
Judicial summary: Assessment of Appellant’s credibility subsequent to giving oral evidence at hearing, finding of mistake of fact in relation to one of the Respondent’s findings but this mistake was not material to the Respondent’s decision to include JA on the Children’s barred list.
Please note the Summary of Decision is included for the convenience of readers. It does not form part of the decision. The Decision and Reasons of the judge follow.
DECISION OF THE UPPER TRIBUNAL
On appeal from: Disclosure and Barring Service (“DBS”)
DBS Reference: P0000KGNWBC
Final Decision Letter: 9th June 2022
The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to dismiss the appeal.
REASONS FOR DECISION
- 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
![[2025] UKUT 17 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png)