![[2025] UKUT 238 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
The Upper Tribunal hearing
The Upper Tribunal hearing
AB attended the hearing, as did Ms Hartley representing DBS. We are grateful to them both, for presenting their respective arguments.
AB, representing herself, also gave evidence at the hearing, including via cross examination and answering questions from the panel.
The hearing was held on the cloud video platform, at AB’s request (with no objection by DBS).
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to dismiss the appeal. The decisions of the Respondent (DBS reference DBS6191 01007562626 ) made on 12 June 2024 (adults’ barred list) and 15 October 2024 (childr
- This appeal
- The legislation underlying DBS’s decisions
- Jurisdiction of the Upper Tribunal
- The grant of permission to appeal
- Documentary evidence in the Upper Tribunal bundle
- The Upper Tribunal hearing
- DBS’s rationale for its decisions
- Did DBS make a mistake in a finding of fact on which its decisions were based?
- DBS’s finding that on 25 December 2022 whilst employed as a support worker at a nursing home, AB refused to reposition service users who were in need of pressure sore relief
- DBS’s finding that on 8 February 2023 whilst employed at the nursing home, AB failed to preserve the dignity of service user SA by transporting him through the home in a state of undress
- DBS’s finding that on 22 February 2023 whilst employed at the nursing home, AB failed to identify that a service user was experiencing a seizure as she had failed to follow the epilepsy support guidel
- DBS’s finding that whilst employed at the nursing home, AB deliberately and repeatedly called a service user by the wrong name in the presence of the service user
- DBS’s finding that whilst employed at the nursing home, AB frequently exhibited hostility and unprofessional conduct towards a number of her colleagues
- DBS’s finding that between 22 January 2024 and 1 March 2024 whilst employed as a support worker for a charity supporting people with learning disabilities, AB failed to support service users in her ca
- The position as regards mistake on a point of law
- Conclusions