Care Standards Tribunal, 2024-08-13 (Mrs JP v Ofsted)
| Jurisdiction | United Kingdom |
| Neutral Citation | [2024] UKFTT 00737 (HESC) |
| Date | 13 August 2024 |
| Registration Number | 2023/01005/EY |
| Court | Care Standards Tribunal |
1
First-tier Tribunal Care Standards
The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Health, Education and Social
Care) Rules 2008
Hearing at Royal Courts of Justice on 23/07/24 – 25/07/24
NCN: [2024] UKFTT 00737 (HESC) Case No.[2023] 01005.EY
BEFORE
Tribunal Judge - Timothy Thorne
Specialist Member – Mr. J. Hutchinson
Specialist Member- Ms. J. Heggie
BETWEEN
Mrs JPAppellant
-v-
Ofsted Respondent
DECISION
Representation
The Appellant: Mr Nicolas Leviseur, Counsel
The Respondent: Mr Praveen Saigal, Solicitor/Advocate, Ofsted
The Appeal
1. This case involves the appeal of JP against the decision of 15 November
2023 to cancel her registration as a childminder on the Early Years Register
and both the compulsory and voluntary parts the General Childcare Register
under section 68(2) of the Childcare Act 2006.
2. Ofsted made the decision to cancel the Appellant’s registration because she
is no longer considered suitable by Ofsted to meet the prescribed
requirements for registration set out in the Statutory Framework for the Early
Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) and the General Childcare Register. The
2
Notice of Decision sets out the detailed reasons.The Appellant’s case in
relation to this is that these allegations are denied.
Restricted Reporting Order
3. The Tribunal makes a restricted reporting order under Rule 14(1) (a) and (b)
of the 2008 Rules, prohibiting the disclosure or publication of any documents
or matter likely to lead members of the public to identify the users of the
service in this case so as to protect their private lives.
Late Evidence
4. During the hearing the Appellant and Ofsted submitted new evidence
contained within a supplementary bundle. In relation to all of this new
material, the Tribunal applied rule 15 of the Tribunal Procedure (First Tier
Tribunal) (Health Education and Social Care Chamber) Rules 2008 and took
into account the overriding objective as set out in rule 2 and admitted the
late evidence (as and when such applications were made) as it had some
relevance to the issues in dispute.
The Hearing
Evidence on behalf of the Respondent
5. TheTribunal heard the oral testimony and took into account the written
evidence of the following witnesses:
a.Natalie Moir, Ofsted Regulatory Inspector
b.Julie Swann, Ofsted Senior Officer
c. Amanda Hitchcock, LADO, Surrey Council
d.Ross Linaker Acting Detective Inspector
6. Their evidence can be summarised as follows: The Appellant was registered
as a childminder with Ofsted in December 2002. She has an ‘outstanding’
inspection history. The Appellant's husband was separately registered as a
childminder with Ofsted but chose to co-childmind together, keeping one
register of children between them from their home address. Also living with
them were their son and daughter, now aged 23 and 14 respectively. The
Appellant’s husband’s registration has now been cancelled.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting