![[2024] UKUT 318 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
Finding 2
Finding 2
It was not in dispute that RR did say that he planned to drink alcohol while on a sleep-in shift if he could not sleep; but RR’s evidence was that he would only actually have drunk the alcohol if a manager had permitted it, via text.
We find that RR planned to use the alcohol as a sleeping aid, as he had difficulties getting to sleep and had forgotten to bring his sleep medication. We think it unlikely that, had he been about to drink the alcohol to help him sleep, RR would first have texted his manager for permission. We do not therefore think that DBS erred in making the factual finding it did.
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to dismiss the appeal. The decision of the Respondent made on 5 October 2022 (DBS reference DBS6191 00974116299 ) to include RR in the adults’ barred list is conf
- DBS’s decision
- Jurisdiction of the Upper Tribunal
- Documentary evidence in the Upper Tribunal bundle
- The Upper Tribunal hearing
- Review of the evidence, our findings of fact, and conclusions on whether DBS made mistakes in its factual findings
- Finding 2
- Finding 3
- Finding 4
- Finding 5
- Submissions on mistake on point of law
- Conclusions