[2025] UKUT 225 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber

[2025] UKUT 225 (AAC)

Fecha: 27-Feb-2025

Heading

Neutral Citation Number: [2025] UKUT 225 (AAC)

Appeal No. UA-2023-000578-V

IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS CHAMBER

Between:

AA

Appellant

- v -

Disclosure and Barring Service

Respondent

Pursuant to rule 14(1)(b) of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, THE UPPER TRIBUNAL ORDERS that, without the permission of this Tribunal:

No one shall publish or reveal:

the name or address of any of:

a. the Appellant in these proceedings, who is referred to by the cipher AA;

b. the resident who is the subject of allegation 1 found proven by the DBS, who is referred to by the cipher JL;

c. members of staff employed by AA’s former employer, who are referred to by one of the following ciphers: JA, JG, LST, LB and VW,

or any information that would be likely to lead to the identification of any of them or any member of their families in connection with these proceedings.

Any breach of this Order is liable to be treated as a contempt of court and may be punishable by imprisonment, fine or other sanction under section 25 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. The maximum punishment that may be imposed is a sentence of two years’ imprisonment or an unlimited fine.

Before: Upper Tribunal Judge Butler, Tribunal Member Graham and

Tribunal Member Smith

Hearing date(s): 27 February 2025

Mode of hearing: Oral hearing at Civil Justice Centre, Manchester

Representation:

Appellant: Ms Laura Bayley (counsel)

Respondent: Mr Andrew Webster (counsel)

On appeal from:

DBS registration number: 00798155005

DBS Decision Date: 16 March 2023

SUMMARY OF DECISION

Keywords: Mistake on point of law (65.5), Finding of fact (65.9)

The DBS’s Barring Decision involved mistakes of fact on which the Barring decision was based and material mistakes of law. Remitted to the DBS to make a fresh decision.

Please note the Summary of Decision is included for the convenience of readers. It does not form part of the decision. The Decision and Reasons of the judge follow.

DECISION