![[2025] UKUT 079 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
The permission stage
The permission stage
The Appellant was unhappy with the Barring Decision and made an application to the Upper Tribunal for permission to appeal. She argued that the Barring Decision was wrong because she had denied the allegations against her.
On 11 September 2024 Judge Church granted permission to appeal, explaining that what the Appellant had said amounted, in legal terms, to an argument that the Barring Decision was based on material mistakes of fact, namely that it was mistaken in its findings that she:
witnessed the fall of resident MW;
failed to report MW’s fall on a timely basis;
improperly transferred MW back into bed; and
misled the nurse in charge about the incident, causing the resident to suffer neglect.
Judge Church gave permission on the basis that he was satisfied that it was arguable with a realistic prospect of success that the DBS had based the Barring Decision on material mistakes of fact. He directed an oral hearing and ordered that the Appellant attend and make herself available to be cross-examined by counsel for DBS and to answer questions from the panel.
Legal framework
The statutory scheme
There are multiple gateways under Schedule 3 to the SVGA to a person’s name being included on a barred list.
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to dismiss the appeal. The decision of the Disclosure and Barring Service was not based on any mistake in any finding of fact and involved no mistake on any point
- Introduction
- Factual background
- The permission stage
- The ‘relevant conduct’ gateway
- The Upper Tribunal’s jurisdiction under the SVGA
- The relevant authorities
- The Appellant’s evidence at the hearing before the Upper Tribunal
- The parties’ positions in summary
- Analysis Mistake of fact?
- Mistake of law?
- Conclusions