SAK v Disclosure and Barring Service (Finding of Fact) [2026] UKUT 26 (AAC) (19 January 2026)

Executive summary

The Upper Tribunal allowed SAK’s appeal against the Disclosure and Barring Service’s 17 October 2023 decision to place her on the Adults’ Barred List. It found that the DBS’s barring decision involved mistakes of fact and directed the DBS to remove SAK from the list.

Key points

• Parties: SAK appealed against the Disclosure and Barring Service over a barring decision made under the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006.
• Holding: appeal allowed; the Tribunal directed removal from the Adults’ Barred List.
• Reasoning: the DBS’s decision was based on mistakes of fact.
• The Tribunal had also considered whether the DBS’s evidence-gathering and evaluation of conflicting evidence were adequate, but the source text’s clear outcome is the factual-mistake finding.
• Sanctions/export-control angle: no sanctions or export-control issue is addressed; the case is about safeguarding barring and procedural fact-finding.

Why it matters

For national-security and sovereign-risk analysts, the case is relevant as an example of tribunal scrutiny over administrative decisions that can restrict an individual’s ability to work in regulated care settings. It shows that evidence defects and fact mistakes can unwind a barring decision, which matters for regulatory defensibility and disclosure quality.

Implications

Compliance teams and regulators should ensure safeguarding referrals are supported by complete records and internally reconciled evidence before seeking barring action. For litigation strategy, appellants can focus on demonstrable factual error and incomplete disclosure, because the Tribunal can order removal where the DBS’s decision rests on mistaken facts.