[2025] UKUT 117 (AAC)

The appellant first emailed the Upper Tribunal seeking permission to appeal on 23 September 2023. She set out grounds of appeal in an email and attached a copy of the DBS’s final decision letter. That letter included the appellant’s full name and postal address, and email address. It did not state whether she wanted the application to be dealt with at a hearing, but otherwise the appellant’s email of 23 September 2023 complied fully with the requirements of rule 21(3) and (4) and (5) of the Upper Tribunal Rules and was a properly instituted appeal.

Unfortunately, the appellant’s email appears to have been overlooked by the Upper Tribunal’s administrative staff. Also unfortunately, the appellant did not chase her appeal until 29 April 2024, when she was informed by a member of administrative staff that she needed to file a UT10 form. This she did on 11 May 2024, providing reasons for why her appeal was now, as she understood the position, “late”. However, Judge Stout decided that the appeal was not “late” because the rules do not require appellants to complete any particular form; she formally admitted the appeal, waiving the minor irregularity about the appellant having failed to indicate whether she wanted an oral hearing.

In her appeal to this Tribunal, the appellant argued that she did not consider that because she made mistakes with her children she would make mistakes with other people’s lives. She said that she was desperate to get back into the care industry. She enclosed a reference from a friend providing further details of abuse the friend believed LJCB suffered as a child and supporting the appellant’s claims that she loved caring for residents.