![UT UA-2024-000745-V - [2025] UKUT 129 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber
UT UA-2024-000745-V - [2025] UKUT 129 (AAC)
Fecha: 28-Mar-2025
Our assessment of the evidence
Our assessment of the evidence
SLS told us that: (a) there was a conspiracy among the staff to cause trouble for her as a result of her being a whistle blower at Property X; (b) the service users had been influenced to say what they did; and (c) she did not limit the service users’ choices, but tried to encourage them to act sensibly.
- Heading
- On appeal from the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS from now on)
- Some abbreviations
- Introduction
- The reason for referring the case to DBS
- The barring provisions
- The appeal provisions
- Mental Capacity Act 2005
- Our approach to the case
- Service users
- Members of staff
- SLS’s statement to her employer
- SLS replied within minutes, saying
- SLS’s representations to DBS
- References for SLS
- Our assessment of the evidence
- Conspiracy
- Influencing the service users
- Limiting choices
- Conclusion
- Proportionality
- whether the objective of the measure is sufficiently important to justify the limitation of a protected right
- whether the measure is rationally connected to the objective
- whether a less intrusive measure could have been used without unacceptably compromising the achievement of the objective
- whether, balancing the severity of the measure's effects on the rights of the persons to whom it applies against the importance of the objective, to the extent that the measure will contribute to its
- Conclusions