Panel Consideration Meeting - Procedural Applications - Teacher A

Teacher

Teacher A

(

not present

)

Date

Dates

24 September 2024

Registration number

[redacted]

Registration category

Secondary – English

Panel

Lindsay Morris, Angela Brownlie, James Mollison

Legal assessor

John Kiddie

Servicing officer

David Cooper

Presenting officer

Teacher's representative(s)

Not represented

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 Panel Meeting was arranged to consider the following:

An application made by the Presenting Officer for a virtual Full Hearing
A Vulnerable Witness Application made by the Presenting Officer
An application made by the Presenting Officer for the School and the Teacher’s name to be anonymised
An application made by the Teacher for the Witness, the School and the Teacher’s name to be anonymised

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 meeting:

Applications from the Presenting Officer, dated July 2024
Teacher’s Response to Presenting Officer’s Anonymity Applications, dated August 2024
Teacher’s Response to Presenting Officer’s Vulnerable Witness Application and Virtual Hearing Application, dated 8 August 2024
Application from the Teacher, undated
Presenting Officer’s Response to Teacher’s Application, dated August 2024
- Appendix B – Application for Virtual Hearing
Teacher’s Response to Application, Dated 30 July 2024

Preliminary Matters

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 for Virtual Hearing

By default, GTCS conducts all its fitness to teach hearings in person in its dedicated Hearings Suite at its office in Edinburgh. However, in line with Rule 1.7.6, a Fitness to Teach Panel may order that all or any part of a hearing may be conducted by the use of electronic communications provided the method adopted allows the parties, the Panel and any witnesses to attend remotely, and, where the hearing is in public, allows the public to view proceedings.

Electronic communications are commonly used for witnesses to give evidence by participating from a remote location. In addition, an entire hearing may be conducted via electronic communication. Such a hearing is described as a ‘virtual hearing’.

An application for use of electronic communications in relation to a participant taking part in a hearing from a remote location or for a virtual hearing is made by the party who wants to use electronic communication. In certain cases, a proposal is made by GTC Scotland. The relevant procedure and criteria for determining such applications are set out in the Use of Electronic Communications in Hearings Practice Statement.

Virtual Hearing Application

An application dated July 2024 for a virtual hearing] was made by the Presenting Officer. The Panel considered the application and submissions made in response which addressed, in particular, the following factors

Is the Teacher represented?

The Panel was informed that the Teacher was not represented.

Does the Teacher have any particular needs or vulnerabilities?

No particular needs or vulnerabilities were brought to the Panel’s attention.

The nature of the proceedings and issues to be determined at the hearing?

The Panel were informed that all the allegations have not been fully admitted and therefore Stages one and two would need to be determined in a full hearing.

The estimated length of the hearing?

The Panel was informed that a hearing would be expected to last no more than 6 days.

The extent and complexity of the issues in dispute?

The Panel were informed that five or six witnesses would be called to give evidence of their account involving various alleged actions of inappropriate contact by the Teacher.

Will the hearing take place in public or (partly) in private?

The Panel were informed that the Hearing is intended to be in Public.

The volume of documentation to be referred to during the hearing and how documentation will be provided to witnesses for reference, if required?

The Panel was informed that the case bundle was 91 pages, 13 of which was the Investigation Report which is not referred to in Hearings. It was suggested that in this case there was not a significant volume of papers/documentation.

The nature of witnesses to give evidence at the hearing?

One of the witnesses in this case is categorised as a vulnerable witness for which there is a separate Vulnerable Witness application.

How long is each witness estimated to give evidence for?

The Panel were informed that witnesses would not be expected to give their evidence for longer than half a day (three witnesses not taking longer than 2 hours). It was discussed that witnesses would be afforded natural and requested breaks.

Do any of the witnesses have particular needs or vulnerabilities?

The Panel were not informed of any specific vulnerabilities of witnesses other than the those discussed and categorised as vulnerable witness.

Will all participants at the hearing have access to a suitable electronic device?

It is envisaged that all participants will have access to a suitable electronic device. GTC Scotland are able to carry out test calls ahead of the hearing if required.

Will all participants have a suitable internet connection capable of coping with the requirements of a virtual hearing?

It is envisaged that all participants will have a suitable internet connection. GTC Scotland are able to carry out test calls ahead of the hearing if required.

Will all participants have an appropriate location from where they can participate alone and undisturbed?

It is envisaged that all participants have an appropriate location from which they can join the hearing. In guidance issued to all participants, GTC Scotland make it clear that parties and witnesses must be in a private location where they can be alone and will not be disturbed.

Decision

The Panel appreciated that it should balance all of the relevant factors outlined above, the interests of the parties and the public interest in deciding whether or not to grant the application.

The Panel carefully considered the application and submissions made in response to it. The Panel had regard to the Rules and to the Use of Electronic Communications in Hearings Practice Statement as well as the advice, as required, of the Legal Assessor and Servicing Officer.

The Panel decided that the balance of the various factors and interests to be assessed in determining the application weighed in favour of granting the application made.

Accordingly, the Panel granted the application for the hearing to take place virtually.

Presenting Officer's Vulnerable Witness Application

The Panel noted the terms of the allegations in their current form as appearing in the GTCS Panel Consideration Outcome of 28 July 2023:

On 13 June 2019, whilst employed as a Supply Teacher at [redacted] by [redacted], and whilst attending a school play rehearsal in a voluntary capacity, the Teacher did:

(a) touch Former Pupil A’s leg with his hand and move his hand up and down her leg; and
(b) allow Former Pupil A to place her head on his body.
‍
On or around 24 June 2019, whilst employed as a Supply Teacher at [redacted] by [redacted], the Teacher did allow Former Pupil A to sit on his knee in the staff base.
On dates unspecified, whilst employed as a Supply Teacher at [redacted] by [redacted], on more than one occasion, the Teacher did allow female pupils and/or former pupils including Former Pupil A to sit on his lap.
On dates unspecified, whilst employed as a Supply Teacher at [redacted] by [redacted], on more than one occasion, the Teacher did embrace pupils and/or former pupils and/or did kiss them on the cheek.

And as a result of the above it is alleged that the Teacher’s fitness to teach is impaired and/or he is unfit to teach as a result of breaching parts 1.2, 1.3 and 1.6 of GTC Scotland’s Code of Professionalism and Conduct 2012.

The Presenting Officer applied for vulnerable witness status for Pupil A, and for permission for her to give her evidence by video link, and with a supporter.

Decision

The Panel had regard to the GTCS Fitness to Teach Rules 2017 at rules 1.7.29-1.7.30, and to the GTCS Witness and Hearsay Evidence Practice Statement. The Panel was satisfied that without vulnerable witness status, and the special measures sought, the quality of the witness’s evidence would be likely to be diminished because of the sexual nature of the allegations (rule 1.7.29(b)(iii)).

The Panel was satisfied that the witness qualified for Vulnerable Witness status on the basis that the allegations were of a sexual nature and that she was an alleged victim of such behaviour. The Panel also noted that the Teacher did not oppose such an application and considered the special measures sought as proportionate and reasonable in the circumstances.

The Panel granted this application.

Presenting Officer Anonymity Applications

The Presenting Officer also applied for an order requiring anonymisation of the eventual decision to be issued upon determination following the hearing in respect of the Teacher’s name and the school, for the purpose of preventing the indirect identification of Pupil A.

Decision

The Panel had regard to the GTCS Fitness to Teach Rules 2017 at rule 1.7.3, and to the GTCS Privacy & Anonymity Practice Statement.

The Panel also noted that the Teacher had, in effect, made the same application, where he sought anonymisation in respect of himself, Pupil A and the school.

The Panel discussed that if the Teacher, and/or certain information relating to his previous employment, was published then Pupil A could be identified indirectly.

The Panel discussed what information relating to the Teacher and the case more generally may result in the indirect identification of Pupil A.

The Panel decided to grant these applications in the interests of justice and to prevent Pupil A from being identified. The eventual decision should be anonymised in respect of: