Panel Meeting - Privacy and Anonymity Application - Teacher A

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 Rulesn2017 or refers to a provision (or provisions) within them.

Background

The Procedural Meeting was arranged to consider the following:

• The Teacher/Representative applied for the name of the Teacher, his GTC Scotland Registration Number and any other information that may lead to the identification of the Teacher to be anonymised in any hearing proceedings (whether in public or private) and any written decision or documentation of any Fitness to Teach Panel relating to the current allegations, in terms of Rule 1.7.3 of the General Teaching Council for Scotland Fitness to Teach Rules 2017.
• The Teacher/Representative requested that the full GTC Scotland Fitness to Teach hearing be held in private and that the identity of the Teacher is not placed in the public domain at any stage in the Fitness to Teach process

Evidence

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

• Anonymity and Privacy applications dated 12th November 2025
• Supporting medical evidence
• Evidence [redacted]
• [redacted]
• Referral and medical assessment
• Presenting Officer’s response to application dated 20th November 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 took as its starting point that the default position set out in the Fitness to Teach Rules is that fitness to teach hearings are held in public. However, the Panel noted that it had a discretion to make a Privacy or Anonymity order where certain criteria are met. The Panel noted that it was a high bar for an applicant to overcome in persuading a Panel to make an order - orders relating to hearings being held in private or anonymity being conferred should only be made by exception.

The Panel discussed at length the good reasons as to why hearings are held in public and the principle of open justice generally. The Panel was of the view that departing from the default position required a careful balancing of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 8.

The Panel satisfied itself that it could depart from the default position only:

• 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 noted the terms of the Teacher's application and the response from the Presenting Officer dated 20 November 2025. It noted that the Presenting Officer did not oppose the application and that GTC Scotland was ‘neutral’ in respect of the application.

The Panel made its decisions with reference to the Privacy and Anonymity Practice Statement and the Health Matters and Medical Evidence Practice Statement.

Medical Evidence and submissions

In support of both the Privacy and Anonymity applications set out above the Teacher had lodged supporting medical evidence. The Panel assessed that medical evidence carefully with reference to the Health Matters and Medical Evidence Practice Statement before going on to consider the applications more generally. The Panel also considered carefully the submissions made by both parties.

The Panel first assessed the most recent medical evidence submitted – an assessment dated 20 October 2025 [redacted] at [redacted] That assessment was made following a meeting between the Teacher and [redacted] on the same date. [redacted]

In addition, the assessment outlined clearly the state of Teacher's [redacted] at the time of the meeting and linked that directly to the potentially public nature of the ongoing proceedings before GTC Scotland – although the assessment mistakenly refers to the Teaching Regulatory Agency (TRA):

[redacted]

The Panel also took into account the letter dated 3rd September 2025 sent to the Teacher’s GP following a referral to [redacted] and the risk assessment and diagnosis contained therein:

Diagnosis/Impression:

[redacted]

Risk Assessment

[redacted] This is in the context of ongoing investigation from previous employment.

The Panel also noted that there was evidence of [redacted] on the part of the Teacher stretching back to 2022. The Panel was of the view that taken in isolation the disparate items of medical evidence may not have met the requirements of the Practice Statement. However, taken cumulatively the evidence did meet the requirements of the Practice statement in that it was possible to discern a specific diagnosis and to assess the severity of the condition. It was also clear how the condition impacts upon the Teacher's engagement with the hearing process as well as what the treatment is and what the prognosis is. The Panel was satisfied that [redacted].

The Panel noted the crux of the Teacher's submissions:

[redacted]

The Panel also took into account the submissions of the Presenting Officer and the lack of opposition to the applications from GTC Scotland. It noted that the submissions do not appear to question the medical evidence [redacted].

Panels must be satisfied that there is a compelling reason for granting such an application in order to protect an individual's private life. [redacted]

The Panel reached the view that the medical evidence and submissions of both parties taken [redacted].

Privacy

Considering the medical evidence received and the Panel's assessment of it, the Panel reached the conclusion that the facts in this case went some way beyond the Teacher and his family being merely distressed or embarrassed if the proceedings were held in public or any be published. [redacted]. The Panel reminded itself that it had to be satisfied that there is a compelling reason for granting such an application to protect an individual's private life.

The Panel was satisfied that in this case, for the reasons set out above, there was such a compelling reason and therefore granted an order that the full hearing be held in private.

Anonymity

On the same rationale, the Panel reached a decision to grant an Anonymity Order in the terms set out in the application - that is for the name of the Teacher, his GTC Scotland Registration Number and any other information that may lead to the identification of the Teacher to be anonymised in any hearing proceedings and any written decision or documentation of any Fitness to Teach Panel relating to the current allegations.