What the Appellant did next
What the Appellant did next
Having received DBS’ barring decision letter, on 28 July 2022 the Appellant emailed DBS stating that he wished to discuss the letter, he already had a DBS certificate for the next couple of years, had refereed junior football matches for 10 years, and that it was disgraceful to bar him for an incident that occurred almost 20 years ago.
On 4 August 2022, the Appellant made a formal request for permission to make late representations against barring although he candidly accepted that he did not have a “good excuse” for not responding to DBS’ minded to bar letter. Briefly, the Appellant described how his life had changed in the last 20 years and that he devoted much of his spare time to football coaching, and refereeing, for local children.
On 22 August 2022, DBS refused to allow the Appellant to make late representations against barring because “your letters appear to be signed for…and also you have not provided any extenuating circumstances that prevented you from submitting reps on time”.
- Heading
- Upper Tribunal Judge Mitchell
- Judicial summary
- Factual background
- 24 October 2003 – police caution for committing the offence of common assault
- DBS’ decision making
- DBS’ decision
- in relation to the Appellant’s 2004 conviction for causing grievous bodily harm
- in relation to the Appellant’s 2003 caution for common assault
- What the Appellant did next
- Legal framework
- Grounds of appeal
- Ground 1
- Ground 2
- Arguments
- Appellant’s cross-examination at the hearing
- DBS
- Panel’s questioning of the Appellant
- Analysis
- Ground 1
- Disposal
- Conclusions
![[2025] UKUT 329 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png)