[2024] UKUT 85 (AAC)

On 6 August 2021 (nearly a year after the Barring Decision) the TRA Panel made the TRA Decision. At the oral hearing the TRA Panel heard live oral evidence from Father A and the Head Teacher (called by the TRA) and also from XYZ. Each of these witnesses was available for cross examination. Pupil A did not attend and was not available for cross examination.

The TRA Panel found, on the basis of XYZ’s admissions in a ‘Statement of Agreed Facts’ document, that:

“[XYZ] engaged in and / or developed an inappropriate relationship with Pupil A, including by:

Meeting up with and / or taking Pupil A on one or more occasions:

i.

in his car;

ii.

in / to Hartlepool on or around 13 August 2019;

iii.

outside of School”

(see page 669 of the appeal bundle).

XYZ further accepted that this conduct amounted to “unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute”. The TRA Panel found these matters to be proved.

The TRA Panel went on to consider four further allegations, being that XYZ had engaged in and / or developed an inappropriate relationship with Pupil A by:

“b.

instructing and / or inviting Pupil A to communicate with [him] via Snapchat, which did not retain copies of [his] messages or encrypted [his] messages;

c.

communicating with Pupil A on one or more occasions between December 2018 and September 2019 using Snapchat;

d.

kissing Pupil A on one or more occasions;

e.

cuddling Pupil A on one or more occasions.”

The TRA Panel found each of Father A, the Head Teacher and XYZ to be honest in the evidence they gave, but it noted that much of Father A and the Head Teacher’s evidence was evidence of what they had been told by Pupil A, and it was troubled that Pupil A had not attended to give evidence and to have her evidence tested, that her evidence in her witness statement differed from that which she gave in her first police interview, and that no proper explanation had been given for her failure to attend and give evidence. The TRA Panel decided, therefore, to give Pupil A’s evidence only very limited weight. The TRA Panel decided that Father A’s evidence about seeing a photograph on Pupil A’s mobile phone of Pupil A and XYZ kissing was honestly given but it considered that Father A may have misinterpreted the photograph as he viewed it only fleetingly.

The TRA Panel did not find any of the further allegations proved. Based on its findings of fact the TRA Panel decided that while XYZ’s developing an inappropriate relationship with Pupil A by meeting up with her in his car, in or to Hartlepool and outside of school was “ill-advised and inappropriate” (see page 678 of the appeal bundle), there was “no discernible pattern to it” and it decided that such conduct was not “conduct of a sexual nature” and was not “sexually motivated” (see pages 677-8 of the appeal bundle). It concluded that XYZ’s conduct did not amount to conduct which may bring the teaching profession into disrepute.

We discuss the TRA Panel’s decision making and its reasons further in paragraphs 91 to100below.