![[2024] UKUT 318 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
The Upper Tribunal hearing
The Upper Tribunal hearing
RR attended the hearing, as did Mr Serr representing DBS. We are grateful to them both, for presenting their respective arguments clearly.
RR, representing himself, also gave evidence at the hearing, including via cross examination and answering questions from the panel.
The hearing was held on the CVP video platform, rather than “face to face”, largely because RR had informed the Upper Tribunal that this was his preference (he had had experience of an Upper Tribunal hearing on the CVP video platform in the oral “permission” hearing, on 12 February 2024, that preceded the giving of permission for his appeal). RR explained his preference for a “remote” hearing by reference to his health difficulties, as follows:
he had had an aneurysm, and consequent brain surgery, in 2010
the side effects of this, he said, were that he was easily scared and confused (due to pressure on his brain)
he said that thinking of going to London (from his home in the west of England), made him feel like his brain was “going to explode”
he was nearly 64; his memory was deteriorating to his medical history.
RR also said that his mother had unfortunately recently passed away (in the Philippines, it would seem); he was booked to travel to the Philippines, to see the family, and was returning (only) 10 days or so before the hearing.
There were regular breaks during the hearing to cater for RR’s difficulties and ensure that he participated in the proceedings as fully as possible.
- 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