[2024] UKUT 85 (AAC)

This appeal is about the Appellant who was, until recently, a PE teacher at a secondary school. In August 2019 it was alleged that the Appellant had formed an inappropriate relationship with a 16-year-old girl whom he had taught, including giving her lifts in his car, communicating with her via Snapchat, urging her to use an app to conceal communications between them, and kissing her.

The pupil’s father made a complaint to the pupil’s school. He said he had become suspicious of his daughter’s behaviour and decided to follow her on 13 August 2019. He said he witnessed her get into a white Audi with the Appellant, and he followed the car until he lost it near Hartlepool. The pupil initially denied any inappropriate relationship with the Appellant to her father and to the police officers who interviewed her. Her father says she then “broke down” and admitted to him that she had been in a relationship with the Appellant, that they had communicated through Snapchat, that since March 2019 the Appellant would regularly give her lifts in his car, and that they had kissed on 4 occasions. She said that she and the Appellant had discussed what to do if they were “found out” and had agreed to deny anything happened. The pupil was then interviewed by the police a second time and shared this version of events, and she shared a consistent version of events with children’s services.

The Appellant was interviewed by the police on 14 August 2019 and gave a “no comment” interview on advice from his solicitor. His mobile devices were taken for examination. The Appellant met with the head teacher of the school which employed him and the parents of the pupil on 20 August 2019, at which the allegations were put to the Appellant by the head teacher. The Appellant made no comment upon legal advice. On 23 August 2019 the pupil met with the head teacher and said that she had been seeing [XYZ] and that they had been messaging on Snapchat and on an app called “calculator” since just after her 16^th birthday, and [XYZ] had given her lifts in his car since March 2019.

The Appellant was not arrested or charged with any offence. The pupil declined to make a formal statement and the police decided to take no further action.

On 1 September 2019, following a brief investigation by his employer, which found the allegations to be proved, the Appellant was dismissed from his job at the school and referred to both the DBS and the Teaching Regulation Agency (“TRA”).

On 15 September 2020 the DBS decided to place the Appellant’s name on the children’s barred list, thereby preventing him from working with children (the “Barring Decision”).

In May 2021 a three-member professional conduct panel of the TRA (the “TRA Panel”) convened for a remote oral hearing. Having heard evidence and argument it made findings of fact and, based on those findings, decided on 23 August 2021 that, while XYZ’s conduct had breached the Teachers’ Standards and demonstrated “extremely poor judgement”, it was not misconduct so serious that it amounted to unacceptable professional conduct or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute (the “TRA Decision”). The TRA Decision was not appealed.

This appeal is about whether the Barring Decision was based on a mistake of fact or law.