Heading

The Upper Tribunal
(Administrative Appeals Chamber)
[2024] UKUT 171 (AAC)
RR v Disclosure and Barring Service
THE UPPER TRIBUNAL ORDERS that:
No one shall, without the consent of the Upper Tribunal, publish or reveal the name or address of any of the following:
(a) RR, who is the Appellant in these proceedings;
(b) KK, who is the subject of DBS’s findings of fact; and
(c) CM and WF, members of staff of the language course;
or any information that would be likely to lead to the identification of any of them or any member of their families in connection with these proceedings.
Any breach of this order is liable to be treated as a contempt of court and may be punishable by imprisonment, fine or other sanctions under section 25 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. The maximum punishment that may be imposed is a sentence of two years’ imprisonment or an unlimited fine.
Decided following an oral hearing on 20 May 2024 with final submissions in writing.
Representatives | |
RR | Dominic van der Wal, a lawyer acting as friend of RR |
Disclosure and Barring Service | Bronia Hartley of counsel, instructed by DLA Piper UK LLP |
Decision of the Upper Tribunal
On appeal from the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS from now on)
DBS Reference: | 00986867372 |
Decision letter: | 13 February 2023 |
- 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
![[2024] UKUT 171 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png)