Rights of appeal
Rights of appeal
An individual’s appeal rights against a DBS barring decision are governed by section 4 of the 2006 Act:
(1) An individual who is included in a barred list may appeal to the Upper Tribunal against—
…
a decision under paragraph 2, 3, 5, 8, 9 or 11 of Schedule 3 to include him in the list;
a decision under paragraph 17, 18 or 18A of that Schedule not to remove him from the list.
An appeal under subsection (1) may be made only on the grounds that DBS has made a mistake—
on any point of law;
in any finding of fact which it has made and on which the decision mentioned in that subsection was based.
For the purposes of subsection (2), the decision whether or not it is appropriate for an individual to be included in a barred list is not a question of law or fact.
An appeal under subsection (1) may be made only with the permission of the Upper Tribunal.
Unless the Upper Tribunal finds that has made a mistake of law or fact, it must confirm the decision of DBS.
If the Upper Tribunal finds that DBS has made such a mistake it must—
direct DBS to remove the person from the list, or
remit the matter to DBS for a new decision.
If the Upper Tribunal remits a matter to DBS under subsection (6)(b)—
the Upper Tribunal may set out any findings of fact which it has made (on which DBSmust base its new decision); and
the person must be removed from the list until DBS makes its new decision, unless the Upper Tribunal directs otherwise.
- 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
![[2025] UKUT 95 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png)