![[2025] UKUT 95 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
Caselaw
Caselaw
In Disclosure and Barring Service v AB [2021] EWCA Civ 1575 [2022] 1 WLR 1002 (DBS v AB) the Court of Appeal considered the respective roles of the Upper Tribunal and the DBS. In particular:
[43] By way of preliminary observation, the role of the Upper Tribunal on considering an appeal needs to be borne in mind. The Act is intended to ensure the protection of children and vulnerable adults. It does so by providing that the DBS may include people within a list of persons who are barred from engaging in certain activities with children or vulnerable adults. The DBS must decide whether or not the criteria for inclusion of a person within the relevant barred list are satisfied, or, as here, if it is satisfied that it is no longer appropriate to continue to include a person's name in the list. The role of the Upper Tribunal on an appeal is to consider if the DBS has made a mistake on any point of law or in any finding of fact. It cannot consider the appropriateness of listing (see section 4(3) of the Act). That is, unless the decision of the DBS is legally or factually flawed, the assessment of the risk presented by the person concerned, and the appropriateness of including him in a list barring him from regulated activity with children or vulnerable adults, is a matter for the DBS.
At Paragraph 54 there was a warning that the UT could not simply remake a decision with which it disagreed. And at paragraph [55] of Lewis LJ made the following observations on the nature of the findings of fact made by the Upper Tribunal:
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to dismiss the appeal
- or any information that would be likely to lead to the identification of any of them
- Legal Framework
- The basis for a “relevant conduct” barring decision
- Rights of appeal
- Caselaw
- [55]. The Upper Tribunal also made findings of fact and made comments on other matters. Section 4(7) of the Act provides that where the Upper Tribunal remits a matter to the DBS it "may set out any fi
- There is no limit to the form that a mistake of fact may take. It may consist of an incorrect finding, an incomplete finding, or an omission. It may relate to anything that may properly be the subject
- And at
- And they concluded as follows Drawing the various strands together, we conclude as follows
- Thus, the fundamental point relevant to this case is that unlike in an appeal under section 11 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 , it is not necessary for the Upper Tribunal to find an
- “We have considered all the information we hold and are satisfied of the following
- seek timely and necessary medical treatment for him and further
- On 18/4/24 the Respondent sent a Final Decision letter to FKF setting out the Barring Decision [373-377]
- Conclusions