The factual background
The factual background
Although the particular circumstances of the incident that gave rise to the barring decision are very much in dispute, the wider factual context is not in issue and may be briefly summarised as follows. The Appellant was employed by the care home as a wake-in-night support worker at a 9-bed residential unit for service users with autism and severe learning disabilities. The unit comprised a series of self-contained flats. Mr N, the service user in question, had extremely complex needs, being largely non-verbal, so having severe communication difficulties, and suffering from tumours and sores on his body, resulting in significant pain management issues. As such, he liked to spend literally hours in the shower, and presented with highly challenging behaviours if he could not make himself understood. He needed monitoring at all times and his complex needs were such that he was provided with 2:1 support within the care home.
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to allow the appeal. The First-tier Tribunal made mistakes in the findings of fact on which its decision was based. Pursuant to Section 4(6)(a) of the Safeguardin
- Introduction
- The two Upper Tribunal oral hearings
- The statutory framework
- The case law authorities
- The people involved in this case
- The factual background
- The DBS decision under appeal
- The Appellant’s grounds of appeal
- The contemporaneous documentary evidence in this case
- The oral evidence in this case
- The Appellant’s oral evidence
- Mr O’s oral evidence
- The Upper Tribunal’s findings of fact
- Conclusions
![[2024] UKUT 052 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png)