![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
The reason for referring the case to DBS
The reason for referring the case to DBS
In her representations to DBS, SLS alleged that EC had only referred the case to DBS because she had left them short-staffed. There is no evidence to support that allegation. Whatever the reason for the referral, the case was referred and DBS had to consider whether to include SLS in either or both of the barred lists. Having decided that the statutory criteria were satisfied, it was under a duty to include her in the lists. SLS’s appeal under section 4 SVGA can only challenge the decision to include her in the lists. It does not allow a review of whether her case was properly referred to DBS.
SVGA
This is the relevant legislation.
- 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