EQ v Disclosure and Barring Service: [2025] UKUT 038 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision by Judge Ward on 3 February 2025
Read the full decision in .
Judicial Summary
In a decision based on alleged “relevant conduct”, the DBS had failed adequately to particularise the allegations in relation to matter A to allow the appellant a fair opportunity to respond. The Minded To Bar (MTB) letter had been lacking in detail and it and its attachments contained inconsistent allegations. It was not enough that careful forensic work on behalf of DBS while preparing for the appeal allowed much of the allegations subsequently to be pieced together. The appellant needed to have had a fair chance to reply at the MTB stage, not least so that the DBS, to whom alone “appropriateness” is entrusted, could consider that issue. In relation to matter B, the panel, having heard evidence from the appellant on which she had been cross-examined, found there to have been a mistake of fact. The case was remitted to the DBS for a fresh decision.