![[2024] UKUT 171 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
CM’s partiality
CM’s partiality
RR suggested that CM was not well disposed towards him. We do not accept that. The most RR could tell us in support was that CM had been hostile towards him when he went into her office on the morning of the first day to ask for some paper for the students. Otherwise, it was a vague suggestion that somehow and for some reason, CM had been able to control or influence the course of the disciplinary proceedings.
- Heading
- This decision is given under section 4 of the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 (SVGA from now on)
- Reasons for Decision DBS’s decision and findings
- The appeal to the Upper Tribunal
- Section 4 SVGA
- RR’s account
- KK’s allegation
- There followed a messenger screenshot showing contact from John Winkle Disciplinary action
- The LADO report
- KK’s allegation
- The disciplinary hearing
- The John Winkle message
- CM’s partiality
- Conclusions