VM v Disclosure and Barring Service

VM v Disclosure and Barring Service

The Upper Tribunal found that, while there were some mistakes of fact and law in two findings of relevant conduct, these were not material to the ultimate barring decision. The core findings of relevant conduct (failures in care, falsification of records) were established on the balance of probabilities, supported by credible evidence. The barring decision was neither irrational nor disproportionate. The appeal was dismissed and the DBS decision confirmed.

Parties
Appellant: VM; Respondent: Disclosure and Barring Service
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal (administrative Law – Safeguarding) / Upper Tribunal – Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; DBS decision confirmed.
Legal Topics
Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups, Barred Lists, Mistake of Fact, Mistake of Law, Proportionality, Irrationality, Disciplinary Proceedings, Special Guardianship, Human Rights – Article 8
Administrative Law Safeguarding Law Employment Law Human Rights Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Barred Lists Mistake of Fact Mistake of Law +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 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

VM

Appellant

Disclosure and Barring Service

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (administrative Law – Safeguarding) / Upper Tribunal – Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the DBS made a material mistake of fact or law in including the Appellant on the Children’s and Adults’ Barred Lists
  2. 2 Whether the barring decision was irrational or disproportionate
  3. 3 Whether the Appellant’s conduct amounted to relevant conduct under the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006

Ratio Decidendi

The Upper Tribunal found that, while there were some mistakes of fact and law in two findings of relevant conduct, these were not material to the ultimate barring decision. The core findings of relevant conduct (failures in care, falsification of records) were established on the balance of probabilities, supported by credible evidence. The barring decision was neither irrational nor disproportionate. The appeal was dismissed and the DBS decision confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; DBS decision confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The decision of the Disclosure and Barring Service dated 20 April 2022 to include the Appellant on the Children’s and Adults’ Barred Lists is confirmed.