HB v Disclosure and Barring Service: [2026] UKUT 307 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision of Judge Citron on 07 August 2026.
Read the full decision in .
Judicial Summary
The Appellant had a difficult mental health history including episodes of mental health crisis during which she caused harm to her children. The Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) included her on both the children’s and adults’ barred lists; the Appellant appealed against her inclusion on the latter list, only. Her grounds were mistake of fact, that DBS’s decision was disproportionate (as she had undertaken effective mental health therapy around the time the decision was made, and that her mental health had improved), and that her conduct vis-a-vis her children was not “relevant conduct” (as it could not be repeated in relation to a vulnerable adult). The Upper Tribunal finds that DBS did not make any material mistake in its findings of fact; that its decision was proportionate, given the seriousness of the risk posed by the appellant to vulnerable adults, if she had a mental health crisis, at the time of DBS’s decision; and that the Appellant’s conduct was “relevant conduct”. The Upper Tribunal considers whether the reasoning on “relevant conduct” and ‘proportionality’ in an earlier decision of the Upper Tribunal, LJCB v DBS [2025] UKUT 117 (AAC), applies to this case by analogy, and decides that it does not. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.