Panel Consideration meeting - Virtual Hearing Application - James Devlin
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.
By default, GTC Scotland 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 (‘Practice Statement’).
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:
- Presenting Officer Application for a Virtual Hearing, dated 14 October 2024 with appendices including:
- Appendix B Application Form
- Email from Servicing Officer to parties following receipt of application, dated 22 October 2024
- Delivery receipt – Teacher, dated 22 October 2024
- Email from Servicing Officer to parties regarding next steps, dated 7 November 2024
- Delivery receipt – Teacher, dated 7 November 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
An application dated 14 October 2024 for a virtual hearing was made by the Presenting Officer. The Panel was satisfied that notice had been served in compliance with Rule 1.6.1 (c). The Panel noted that the Teacher did not respond to the Application. The Panel considered the Application and submissions made in response which addressed, in particular, the following factors:
- Is the Teacher represented?
The Teacher is not represented.
- Does the Teacher have any particular needs or vulnerabilities?
As the Teacher did not respond to the Application, the Panel were not aware of any particular needs or vulnerabilities in respect of the Teacher.
- The nature of the proceedings and issues to be determined at the hearing?
The nature of proceedings is a Fitness to Teach full hearing. The allegations are not admitted; therefore the hearing will commence at Stage 1. The Panel noted that one of the allegations is a conviction, but the remaining two allegations are not. The Panel noted that the Practice Statement indicates that it would be easier to conduct a full hearing commencing from Stage 2. However, given there are no witnesses in this case, and the case is therefore reliant on papers only, it will not be a substantial hearing.
- The estimated length of the hearing?
The Presenting Officer estimates that the hearing will take no more than 2 days to conclude.
- The extent and complexity of the issues in dispute?
The Presenting Officer states in his Application that the issues in dispute are not overly complex. However, the Panel noted that they did not have the allegations regarding this case in front of them, so they were unable to form an opinion on whether the issues were complex or not. However, the Panel did recognise that this case will proceed from Stage 1, and there are three allegations with no witnesses being called.
- Will the hearing take place in public or (partly) in private?
The hearing is currently taking place 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 documentation amounts to 123 pages currently. There are currently no witnesses in this hearing.
- How easily the Panel will be able to assess the credibility and reliability of witnesses
There are no witnesses in this case currently, therefore assessing the credibility and reliability of witnesses will not be an issue for the Panel.
- The nature of witnesses to give evidence at the hearing?
There are currently no witnesses in this hearing.
- How long is each witness estimated to give evidence for?
There are currently no witnesses in this hearing.
- Do any of the witnesses have particular needs or vulnerabilities?
There are currently no witnesses in this hearing.
- What confidence is there that each witness will be able to follow questions easily and any documents being referred to?
There are currently no witnesses in this hearing.
- Will all participants at the hearing have access to a suitable electronic device?
The Presenting Officer states that it is envisaged that all participants will have access to a suitable electronic device. GTC Scotland can carry out test calls ahead of the hearing if required. The Panel noted that there appear to be limited participants in this hearing. As the Teacher did not respond to the Application, the Teacher’s position is unknown as to whether he has a suitable electronic device. However, given he is a teacher, the Panel were of the view it would be unlikely that he does not have access to a suitable device.
- Will all participants have a suitable internet connection capable of coping with the requirements of a virtual hearing?
The Presenting Officer states that it is envisaged that all participants will have a suitable internet connection. GTC Scotland can carry out test calls ahead of the hearing if required. The Panel noted that there appear to be limited participants in this hearing. As the Teacher did not respond to the Application, the Teacher’s position is unknown as to whether he has a suitable internet connection.
- Will all participants have an appropriate location from where they can participate alone and undisturbed?
The Presenting Officer states that it is envisaged that all participants will have an appropriate location from which they can join the hearing. The Panel noted that there appear to be limited participants in this 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. As the Teacher did not respond to the Application, the Teacher’s position is unknown as to whether he has an appropriate location to participate from.
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.
The Panel noted that knowing what the allegations are in this case would have supported them in their decision-making process. The Panel acknowledged that it is noted in the Practice Statement that generally, the Panel should not take the nature of the allegations into account when deciding whether to hold a virtual hearing. The Legal Assessor advised that the Panel should have been made aware of what the allegations are when making decisions and this is required by law in order for the process to be fair, and the principle of open justice to be adhered to. The Legal Assessor advised that the Practice Statement is just guidance for the Panel, and it is not legally binding. The Panel acknowledged the legal advice.
The Panel could not identify a strong reason not to grant the Application. The Panel considered the legal advice provided and was satisfied that the case was not overly complex, as outlined by the Presenting Officer, given it will be a short hearing, the lack of witnesses, the number of allegations, and the lack of engagement from the Teacher. The Panel noted that they had no reason to doubt the Presenting Officer’s conclusion that the case is not overly complex.
The Panel was satisfied that it was in the public interest to deal with this case in line with the general objective of the Rules, which is to deal with cases fairly and justly. This includes avoiding delay, so far as compatible with the proper consideration of the issues. The Panel also noted that granting this Application would have environmental benefits, as well as reduce costs associated with travelling to a hearing. The Panel acknowledged that there has been no expression of preference for it to be in person from the Teacher.
The Panel was in agreement that they could not establish any reasons as to why this Application should not be granted.
Accordingly, the Panel granted the Application for the hearing to take place virtually.
