![[2024] UKUT 85 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
The statutory framework
The statutory framework
Because the nature and extent of the Upper Tribunal’s jurisdiction and powers in relation to appeals against barring decisions is somewhat unusual, we set out below an outline of the statutory framework for appeals such as this.
DBS was established by the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, taking on the functions of the Criminal Records Bureau and the Independent Safeguarding Authority. One of its main functions is the maintenance of the children’s barred list and the adults’ barred list (the “Barred Lists”, and each a “Barred List”). Its power and duty to do so arises under the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 (the “2006 Act”).
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to dismiss the appeal: the decision of the Disclosure and Barring Service (“DBS”) DBS made on 15 September 2020 to include the Appellant’s name in the Children’s
- What this appeal is about
- Preliminary issue: anonymity
- The Barring Decision
- The TRA Decision
- The legal issues in this appeal
- The statutory framework
- Duty to maintain the Barred Lists
- Criteria for inclusion in the children’s barred list
- Appeals of decisions to include, or not to remove, persons in the Barred Lists
- The recent authorities on the Upper Tribunal’s “mistake of fact” jurisdiction
- Issue 1: Did DBS err in law by making a final decision to place XYZ’s name on the Children’s Barred List without awaiting the outcome of the TRA proceedings?
- Issue 2: What is the significance of the TRA Decision?
- Issue 2: Was the Barring Decision based upon a material mistake of fact?
- Findings that XYZ holds an exploitative attitude, formed a personal relationship with Pupil A for his own gratification, and holds a significant sexual interest in teenage girls, having engaged in sex
- Conclusions