![[2024] UKUT 052 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
The people involved in this case
The people involved in this case
In this decision we refer to the Appellant simply by refence to her status as such. We refer to the other individuals involved in this case as follows:
Mrs A: The Appellant’s co-worker
Mr B: The care home’s registered manager
Mr K: Another support worker
Mr N: The service user
Mr O: The shift leader
Ms S: The care home’s regional manager/ operations manager
To ensure anonymity remains in place, where we have quoted from original source documents, we have replaced the various individuals’ real names with the appropriate initials as detailed above. For the same reasons of ensuring anonymity, we refer to the Appellant’s employer as simply ‘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