[2025] UKUT 329 (AAC)

The Upper Tribunal allows this appeal and remits this matter to DBS for a new decision. We do not consider that this is a case in which, in accordance with AB, the Upper Tribunal may properly direct DBS to remove the Appellant from the children’s barred list.

The default position under section 4(7)(b) of the 2006 Act is that a person is removed from a barred list pending a new DBS decision. We have not been asked to direct that the Appellant remains on the children’s barred list pending DBS’ new decision. We make no such direction and, therefore, the Appellant is removed from the children’s barred list pending DBS’ new decision.

Section 4 of the 2006 Act does not confer power on the Upper Tribunal to give directions about evidence to be obtained before DBS make a new decision. However, we would strongly recommend that evidence is obtained (whether by the DBS, the Appellant or jointly) in the form of a report from a psychiatrist or psychologist about the Appellant’s ongoing propensity (if any) to violence, taking into account his three cautions and convictions between 2000 and 2004.