Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber

UT UA-2024-000745-V - [2025] UKUT 129 (AAC)

Fecha: 28-Mar-2025

Some abbreviations

Some abbreviations

SLS is the appellant. In the evidence we have quoted, she was sometimes referred to by her name and sometimes by her initials. We have changed all the references to SLS.

SLS worked in the care sector for most of her life. From 2019 to 2023, she worked for EC. At first, she worked at Property X. She left that property in 2020 after whistle blowing about thefts from service users. She then moved to Property Y. DBS’s findings relate to the time when she was at Property Y.

When EC management received complaints about her language and behaviour, she was suspended by the service manager. We refer to the manager as GD throughout and ignore her change of surname.

SLS resigned from EC and worked as a support worker with another provider until she was added to the barred lists. We have not named or used initials for that provider.

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