Following a caution for dishonesty and the discovery that she had failed to declare driving convictions on her employment application, the appellant Secretary of State included the respondent care worker on the list of people unsuitable to work with vulnerable adults. On 29 September 2006, the respondent appealed to the Care Standards Tribunal. The tribunal held that it could not make certain findings of fact concerning a conflict between the respondent’s evidence relating to her caution and prior convictions, and the evidence of the proprietor of the care home in which she had worked. The tribunal went on, however to order the removal of her name from the list on the balance of the evidence before it and on the basis that the Secretary of State had failed to satisfy s 86(3) of the Care Standards Act 2000.
Held: Appeal allowed
In neglecting to make adequate findings of fact concerning the evidence of the respondent the tribunal had failed to include highly material matters relevant to whether the respondent’s name should be on the list in its considerations. That failure fed into the tribunal’s conclusions and vitiated them.