MM v Disclosure and Barring Service

MM v Disclosure and Barring Service

The appeal is dismissed because the DBS did not make any mistake of fact or law in its decision to include MM on the adults' and children's barred lists. The passage of time without further offending, in the absence of demonstrated insight and risk management, does not render the decision irrational or disproportionate. Inclusion on the children's barred list is lawful even without evidence of sexual interest in children, as the statutory definition of 'child' includes all under 18s and the risk assessment was rational.

Parties
Appellant: MM; Respondent: Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Administrative Decision (dbs Barring) / Final Judgment After Oral Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; DBS decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Disclosure and Barring Service, Barred Lists, Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006, Appeals on Mistake of Law or Fact, Proportionality, Risk Assessment, Sexual Offences, Regulated Activity, Article 8 ECHR
Administrative Law Criminal Law Safeguarding Law Human Rights Disclosure and Barring Service Barred Lists Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 Appeals on Mistake of Law or Fact +5 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MM

Appellant

Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Administrative Decision (dbs Barring) / Final Judgment After Oral Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the passage of time without reoffending renders inclusion on the Barred Lists irrational or disproportionate
  2. 2 Whether inclusion on the children's barred list is lawful where there is no evidence of sexual interest in children
  3. 3 Whether the DBS made a mistake of fact or law in barring MM

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the DBS did not make any mistake of fact or law in its decision to include MM on the adults' and children's barred lists. The passage of time without further offending, in the absence of demonstrated insight and risk management, does not render the decision irrational or disproportionate. Inclusion on the children's barred list is lawful even without evidence of sexual interest in children, as the statutory definition of 'child' includes all under 18s and the risk assessment was rational.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; DBS decision confirmed

Orders

  • The appeal is refused.
  • The decision of the DBS made on 17 February 2022 is confirmed.