seek timely and necessary medical treatment for him and further
seek timely and necessary medical treatment for him and further
concealed the truth about how the injuries had occurred.
On 28/3/22 an Enhanced DBS Certificate was issued in respect of FKF.
Cheshire Police included on the Certificate (amongst other matters) details of the injuries suffered by VFF, the initial opinion of Dr Fowler that the injuries may have been self-inflicted and the subsequent conclusion by the medical professional that the injuries were non-accidental physical injuries [21-23].
On 27/1/23 the Respondent sent a Minded to Bar letter. The letter set out the Respondent’s view that it may be appropriate to include FKF on the adult’s barred list [39-43]. That letter could not be delivered to FKF [46].
On 3/3/23 FKF was placed on the adult’s barred list [54-57]. The Final Decision Letter setting out the decision was not sent to FKF because of the lack of a valid address.
On 19/1/24 FKF appealed against the Respondent’s decision [2-8]. FKF stated (amongst other matters) that the police had found her not guilty and that the paediatrician who had examined VFF believed that he was capable of inflicting the injuries on himself.
On 13/2/24 the Minded to Bar letter dated 27/1/23 and the Final Decision Letter of 3/3/23 were sent to FKF as DBS had been made aware of her address [82- 87].
On 19/2/24 FKF was sent a Minded to Bar letter setting out the Respondent’s view that it might be appropriate to add FKF’s name to the children’s barred list [102-105]. The letter attached the documents relied upon by the Respondent in forming that view [108-341] which included the Cheshire police letter of 1/5/22, the interview notes from FKF’s police interview, various witness statements including from VFF and her daughter, KF, then aged 5, foster carers, social services records and the Family Court Order.
On 13/3/24 FKF submitted a lengthy response to the Minded to Bar letter. FKF stated that she was innocent of the allegations against her. FKF alleged that social services had withheld evidence from the Family Court [343-349].
- 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)