Panel Consideration Meeting - Anonymity Application - Teacher B

Definitions

Any reference in this decision to:

• 'GTC Scotland’ means the General Teaching Council for Scotland;
• the ‘Panel’ means the Fitness to Teach Panel considering the case; and
• the ‘Rules’ (and any related expression) means the GTC Scotland Fitness to Teach Rules 2017 or refers to a provision (or provisions) within them.

 Background

The Procedural Meeting was arranged to consider the following:

An anonymity application on behalf of the Teacher.

Evidence

In accordance with Rule 1.7.17, the Panel admitted all of the documents and statements listed below as evidence for the purposes of the hearing:

1. An anonymity application by the Teacher dated 28 November 2024, with the appendix:
   
   (a) [redacted] report, dated 30 September 2024
   ‍
2. Fitness to Teach Panel Consideration Outcome 25 February 2024
3. The case papers which were available at panel consideration on 25 February 2024, being:
   
   (a) Final Investigation Report, dated 29 November 2024, with appendices including:
   
   (i) Letter from Employer to Teacher– Suspension and notice of investigation, dated 3 May 2022
   (ii) Letter from Employer to Teacher – Investigation Invite, dated 20 May 2022;
   (iii) Email from Teacher to Employer – Resignation, dated 14 June 2022;
   (iv) Letter from Employer to Teacher - accepting resignation, dated 14 June 2022;
   (v) Employer referral form, dated 28 June 2022;
   (vi) Letter from Police Scotland to GTC Scotland - Information on charge status, dated 19 July 2022;
   (vii) Email from Teacher’s representative to GTC Scotland – setting out the teacher’s original position on the allegations, dated 23 August 2022;
   (viii) Full Extract conviction report from Hamilton Sheriff Court to GTC Scotland dated 27 June 2023;
   (ix) Email from Teacher’s representative to GTC Scotland – setting out Teacher’s updated position, dated 6 July 2023;
   (x) Email from Police Scotland to GTC Scotland, dated 26 July 2023;
   (xi) Email from Teacher’s representative to GTC Scotland – providing additional information on the vulnerable adult and the Compensation Order payment, dated 28 August 2023;
   (xii) Teacher’s response to Interim Report, dated October 2023;
   (xiii) Bank Statement showing payment of [redacted], dated 1 January 2023-31 January 2023;
   (xiv) Email from COPFS confirming date Teacher pled guilty, dated 15 November 2023;
   (xv) Letter from Disclosure Scotland – Teacher on adults list, dated 2 August 2024;
   (xvi) Response from Teacher, dated 7 October 2024;
   (xvii) Teacher’s reflective statement, dated 18 September 2024;
   
   (b) Statements of support:
   
   (i) Supporter 1;
   (ii) Supporter 2;
   (iii) Supporter 3;
   
   (c) Notice of Investigation, dated 4 July 2022;
   (d) Notice of Investigation Royal Mail proof of delivery, dated 5 July 2022;
   (e) Notice of Panel Consideration, dated 10 January 2024;
   (f) Notice of Panel Consideration, re-issue, dated 3 December 2024; and
   (g) Email from Teacher’s representative acknowledging re-issue of Notice of Panel Consideration and advising no further comment, dated 4 December 2024.

Preliminary Matters 

The Panel carefully considered the terms of Rule 2.5.1:

At any stage of proceedings, a Panel of its own volition, on the Convener’s direction or upon the application of a party (in such form as may be specified by the Servicing Officer), may:

(a) determine any interim or preliminary matter that has arisen in the case;
(b) resolve any issues of law; or
(c) consider an application for a case to be cancelled.

Unless a party has (in the relevant application) requested that a procedural hearing be held or a Panel considers that such a hearing is necessary in the particular circumstances, the above matters will be considered by a Panel at a meeting based on the written representations made by the parties in compliance with case management directions set for this purpose.

The Panel noted that neither of the Parties requested the procedural hearing in the submissions made. Further to this, the Panel considered that a procedural hearing was not necessary. Therefore, the Panel proceeded to consider the matter on the papers.

Application

After Panel consideration on 25 February 2025 a previous panel had determined that the Teacher’s fitness to teach was impaired. That Panel determined that a Reprimand should be imposed for a period of 1 year. That Panel decided to issue a consent order in that respect, in accordance with Rule 2.7. The Teacher also made an application dated 28 November 2024 as follows:

For the name of the Teacher, her GTCS Registration Number and any other information that may lead to the identification of the Teacher and/or Individual A, [. . .], to be anonymised in any written decision or documentation of the Consideration Panel in terms of Rule 1.7.3 of the General Teaching Council for Scotland Fitness to Teach Rules 2017.

With the application was submitted a report from [redacted] dated 30 September 2024. In that report [redacted] offered his opinion that the Teacher suffers from [redacted]. He also offered the view that publicity and press reporting in the Teacher’s case would lead to an increased likelihood of [redacted]. Anonymity on the other hand would reduce the Teacher’s risk of [redacted], in [redacted]’s view.

The application was said to be made on a twofold basis. In addition to the medical information, it was submitted that the Teacher’s wish that the potential identification of “Individual A” (a person referred to in the allegations against the Teacher, which she has admitted). Publication of the Teacher’s name or identification of her by other means, could then lead to identification of Individual A. GTC Scotland had anonymised “Individual A” in their own materials in line with their publication policy.

Additionally, the application was made on the basis that it was appropriate due to the requirement to protect the Teacher’s private life and in particular her health, and to prevent the risk of [redacted]. It was submitted that publicity would exacerbate the Teacher’s pre-existing diagnoses of [redacted].

There were no representations from GTC Scotland on the application.

Decision

The Panel had regard to the Rules as well as the Privacy and Anonymity Practice Statement. Rule

1.7.3 provides that a Panel may make an order with a view to preventing or restricting the public disclosure of any aspect of proceedings.

In the Panel’s view, publication is the norm and applications for anonymity require to cross a high bar. The Panel recognised that where competing interests arose, they required to strike a balance between those interests and determine which was to be preferred. In the present case, there is a public interest in publicity, which has to be weighed against the Teacher’s right to respect for her private and family life, an element of which is her health.

The Panel considered [redacted]’s report. With regard to the Health Matters and Medical Evidence Practice Statement, the Panel determined that this was an appropriately detailed report from a suitably qualified medical practitioner, which provided relevant evidence. It provides a specific diagnosis and answers the necessary questions in a detailed manner. Treatment and prognosis were addressed. The Panel was satisfied that the report met the suggested requirements of the practice statement, and it was satisfied that it could rely on the report for the purposes of its decision on the Teacher’s application.

The Panel decided that in the absence of any contradictor, it should accept that medical opinion from [redacted]. This included [redacted]’s opinion as to the likely consequence on the Teacher of publicity, including detriment to her [redacted] health, and a risk of [redacted]. In the Panel’s view, this went beyond a concern as to embarrassment or damage to reputation, and was evidence, which the Panel accepted, of a risk of [redacted] to the Teacher. The Panel also agreed that Individual A had an interest in privacy which would be interfered with by publicity. The Panel accepted that it would be likely that if the Teacher were identified, Individual A could also be identified. On that basis, the Panel considered that in the particular circumstances of this case the risk of [redacted] to the

Teacher and the interest in protection of Individual A’s private life taken together, outweighed the general rule that consent orders are made public. They therefore decided to grant the Teacher’s application.

The Panel therefore directed that the Teacher’s name, registration number, date of conviction, date of sentence, and the terms of her compensation order, should be redacted in the Panel Consideration outcome of 25 February 2025, and the consent order.