[2024] UKUT 224 (AAC)

We are satisfied that the Barring Decision involved a material mistake of fact.

The Barring Decision was based firmly on the primary finding of fact that the Appellant engaged in the conduct which we have now found he did not engage in. Its secondary findings as to the Appellant’s lack of empathy, the Appellant’s lack of insight and the risk that the Appellant might repeat the conduct were predicated on that mistaken finding and are not sustainable.

The DBS has not argued that it would have placed the Appellant’s name on any Barred List solely on the basis of his alleged confrontational behaviour with colleagues when they alleged that he had assaulted the patient in the way suggested. In any event, we consider that a decision to do so would have been disproportionate.

The appropriate disposal, therefore, is to direct the DBS to remove the Appellant’s name from the Barred Lists.