Panel Consideration Meeting - Privacy Application - Julie Pirie

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:

• That matters relating to [redacted] in the lead up to the time of the allegations and during the allegations are heard in private session.

Evidence

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

1. Teacher/Representative Privacy application, dated from 4 August 2025
2. Presenting Officer’s response contained within application, dated 19 August 2025

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 a 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.

Decision

The Panel noted the fulsome and detailed submissions of the Teacher's representative in which Part Privacy within the Full Hearing was requested, specifically it was requested:

That all matters relating to [redacted] in the lead up to the time of the allegations and during the allegations are heard in private session.

The Panel also noted that the Presenting Officer did not oppose the application.

The Panel’s starting point was that fitness to teach hearings should be held in public and that an order to conduct part of the hearing in private should only be made by exception. The Panel considered very carefully the nature of the evidence that it was proposed be heard in private session. The Panel carried out a balancing of the competing Article 6 and Article 8 considerations in this matter.

Article 6 and Article 8

The Panel was aware that its decision should be consistent with Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and reached the conclusion that the limited circumstances under Article 6 where the press and public may be excluded were met in that the protection of the private life of the parties required it.

The Panel was satisfied that on balance the submissions made on behalf of the Teacher as to the nature of the evidence to be heard in private was such that the exception was engaged.

In relation to the exception identified by the panel above, Article 8 of the ECHR is also relevant:

1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence; and

2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic wellbeing of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

In line with this general legal position, the Rules state that the Panel did have discretion to make an order with a view to preventing or restricting the public disclosure of any aspect of proceedings.

The Rules state that a Panel may do this:

• So far as it considers necessary;
• Where it is satisfied (having given the relevant parties an opportunity to make representations and in compliance with all relevant Convention rights) that it is in the interests of justice to do so; and
• The particular circumstances of the case outweigh the interests of the Teacher and the public in the hearing being held in public.

The Panel gave appropriate weight to the principle of open justice and balanced that against the Article 8 rights of the Teacher and her family and the sensitive nature of the evidence which was to be heard in private.

After careful consideration the Panel was satisfied that their decision to make such an order was in the interests of justice and that the particular circumstances of this case and the evidence to be heard in private as outlined in submissions do outweigh the interests of the Teacher and the public in the hearing being held in public.

Accordingly, the application for Part Privacy within the fitness to teach hearing is granted.