[2025] UKUT 113 (AAC)

The DBS’s barring decision was principally based on two findings of relevant conduct – the exchange of sexual messaging and the possession of IIOC. For the reasons above we find no mistake of fact in the former although we conclude there was a mistake of fact as regards the latter. However, we consider the mistake in relation to the second finding of relevant conduct does not materially impact on the DBS’s decision overall to include the Appellant in the Children's Barred List. This is because we consider there is no error of law or mistake of fact on which the Respondent’s decision was based in relation to the first finding of relevant conduct. Furthermore, this first finding of fact is sufficiently serious by itself to justify inclusion on the Children's Barred List, irrespective of the outcome in relation to the second finding. Thus, we are satisfied that it is inevitable that the DBS would have decided to include the Appellant on the Children’s Barred List based on the first finding of relevant conduct alone. Accordingly, the mistake in relation to the possession of IIOC was not material to the outcome of the process.