SA v Disclosure and Barring Service: [2026] UKUT 232 (AAC)
Summary
The Upper Tribunal considered the correct approach to a second appeal concerning the Disclosure and Barring Service’s decision to keep an individual on the adults’ barred list. It held that DBS was bound by earlier tribunal findings, could rely on additional facts only within limits, and had erred by departing from binding findings and making unsupported factual findings. The appeal was allowed and the matter remitted to DBS for a fresh decision.
Why it matters
While not directly about residential property, the decision is relevant to surveyors and firms where safeguarding checks may be required for staff or contractors working with vulnerable adults. It also clarifies how tribunal findings and issue estoppel operate in repeat regulatory appeals, which is useful for compliance and HR risk management.
Key points
- Upper Tribunal addressed a second-time-round appeal under the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006.
- DBS was bound by findings of fact made by the earlier tribunal decision.
- Issue estoppel and Henderson v Henderson principles were held to apply to issues already determined or that should have been raised earlier.
- The tribunal found DBS had materially erred by departing from binding findings and relying on unsupported facts.
- The case was remitted to DBS for a new decision based on the tribunal’s findings.
This is an RPSA summary of a publicly available article. The full content remains with the original publisher.
