![[2025] UKUT 228 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
Evidence from JD
Evidence from JD
In addition to his letter dated 13 October 2024, JD gave evidence that his family and VMAC’s had known each other for about 6 or 7 years. He had never known VMAC to act as a violent person during that time. JD knew that VMAC was not able to carry on in his work because an official body had stopped him doing that work. JD added that he and his wife knew VMAC and PC before her son and mother-in-law came to the UK. They had seen VMAC’s family come together and saw such good qualifies in each of them, but recognised it was difficult for any family to come together, especially one from many different backgrounds. JD observed he thought that if only they could see the qualities in each other, but sometimes there is focus on negative traits.
When questioned by Mr Richards, JD confirmed he knew about the allegations that VMAC had hit his stepson when he wrote his supportive letter dated 13 October 2024.
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to ALLOW the appeal and REMIT the matter to the Disclosure and Barring Service for a new decision
- A summary of the factual background
- The Barring Decision
- Appeal grounds
- The Upper Tribunal substantive oral hearing
- The legal framework for Barring Decisions
- Oral evidence at the hearing
- VMAC’s evidence
- Evidence from JD
- Evidence from LC
- Submissions from the parties
- Our analysis
- The wording used in the Barring Decision Process summary (and in turn, in the Minded to Bar and Final Decision Letters)
- Was there a mistake of fact and / or was there a mistake or mistakes of law?
- Was any mistake of fact one on which the Barring Decision was based and was any mistake of law material?
- Conclusions