[2024] UKUT 401 (AAC)

This is not a case in which the Upper Tribunal, on appeal, is merely reviewing the evidence before the DBS. The Upper Tribunal has before it evidence that was not before the DBS, in particular the Appellant’s witness statement and her oral evidence. The Upper Tribunal is entitled to find that the Appellant’s denial of wrongdoing, in particular her denial that she sexually abused her daughter, is credible, so that it was a mistake of fact to find that the Appellant sexually abused her daughter (RI). Since this is not a case in which we have the same material as was before the DBS, we are not precluded from overturning the DBS’ findings unless they are irrational or there was ‘simply no evidence to justify the decision’ (RI).

We are conscious of the need to distinguish findings of fact from value judgements (AB). However, the key finding made against this Appellant, that she sexually abused her daughter, involves in our judgment matters of pure fact.