LJP v Disclosure and Barring Service: [2026] UKUT 215 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision by Judge Citron on 08 June 2026.
Read the full decision in .
Judicial Summary
The appellant was a carer who from time to time was engaged by an agency to carry out care assignments. DBS, in deciding to include the appellant in the adults’ barred list, made a factual finding that the appellant had accepted such a care booking but then failed to attend and allowed someone else to attend in her place. It was common ground that an imposter had attended the care booking in the appellant’s place: the question was whether DBS had made a mistake because, according to the appellant, because of extraordinary circumstances at the time (it was during the Covid pandemic), someone else had charge of the appellant’s phone at the time and had made the agency booking without the appellant’s knowledge or consent. Upon weighing the evidence, the Upper Tribunal found that, on the balance of probabilities, DBS had not made a mistake in finding that the appellant had foreknowledge of the booking, had in effect accepted it, and had allowed the imposter to attend in her place. The appeal was therefore dismissed.