DWH v Disclosure & Barring Service (Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups) [2025] UKUT 417 (AAC) (12 December 2025)

Executive summary

The Upper Tribunal partly allowed DWH’s appeal against a DBS barring decision made on 22 July 2024. It confirmed his inclusion on the Adults’ Barred List, but found a mistake of fact and law in his inclusion on the Children’s Barred List and directed his removal from that list.

Key points

• Parties: DWH appealed against the Disclosure & Barring Service under the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006.
• Holding: appeal dismissed in part and allowed in part; Adults’ Barred List inclusion confirmed, Children’s Barred List inclusion set aside.
• Reasoning: the Tribunal found no mistake of fact or law for adult barring, but did find such a mistake for child barring.
• Facts relied on by DBS: alleged relevant conduct on 9 February 2023 while volunteering in a hospital involved entering a male patient’s room and attempting to look at or make contact with the patient’s genitals.
• Procedural context: the appellant had sought disclosure and a delay in the DBS process, saying he lacked the Trust’s investigation materials before responding.

Why it matters

The decision shows that DBS barring outcomes can be split by vulnerable-group category even on the same factual allegation, which matters for employment vetting and safeguarding risk management. For national-security or sanctions audiences, its relevance is indirect: it is a public-law control over access to vulnerable persons, not a sanctions or export-control case.

Implications

For compliance and litigation strategy, the case underscores the need to test separately the evidential and legal basis for adult and child barring rather than treating them as automatically linked. It also highlights the importance of disclosure and procedural fairness arguments in challenging DBS decisions, especially where the underlying investigation materials are incomplete or withheld.