Panel Meeting - Remote Hearing 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 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 Teacher for a remote Full Hearing for all participants.
GTC Scotland conducts its fitness to teach hearings either in person in its dedicated Hearings Suite at its office in Edinburgh, or remotely. Therefore, 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 video link or teleconference 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.
Video link is commonly used for witnesses to give evidence by participating from a remote location. In addition, an entire hearing may be conducted via video link. Such a hearing is described as a 'remote hearing'.
An application for use of either video link or teleconference in relation to a participant taking part in a hearing from a remote location or for a remote hearing is made by the party who wants to use it. In certain cases, a proposal is made by GTC Scotland. The relevant procedure and criteria for determining such applications are set out in the Remote Hearings and Remote Witnesses 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:
- Teacher's Representative's Application for remote hearing, dated 8 September 2025
- Response from Presenting Officer, dated 11 September 2025
- Notice of Presenting Officer's Case Form, dated 11 September 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 suchform 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 applicationfor 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.
Application/Proposal
An application, dated 8 September 2025, for remote hearing was made by the Teacher's Representative.
The Panel considered the application and submissions made in response which addressed, in particular, the following factors:
- Do all remote participants have access to/knowledge of the technology required
It was noted by the Panel that the application was not opposed, and that both the Teacher and the Presenting Officer have access to, and knowledge of the technology required. It was noted that the witnesses also have access to relevant technology and that no issues have been raised regarding the witnesses accessing papers remotely. The Panel acknowledged that test calls will be conducted with each party in advance of the hearing.
- Can the Teacher participate effectively in a remote hearing?
The Panel noted that it was the Teacher who made the application which indicates that the Teacher will be in a position to participate effectively in a remote hearing. The Teacher is represented and has not indicated that he has any particular needs or vulnerabilities that would impact on his ability to participate remotely, or his ability to communicate with his representative remotely.
- Do the particular circumstances of the case suggest that a remote hearing would be suitable?
The hearing is a full conduct hearing starting at stage 2. The Panel noted that the allegations are admitted, and nothing remains in dispute, suggesting that the number of hearing days will not be extensive.
The Panel noted that the witnesses are expected to give evidence at the hearing for about 40 minutes which theydid notconsider a long periodof time.The Panelconsideredany vulnerabilities of witnesses but agreed that no barriers or vulnerabilities had been brought to their attention. The Panel agreed that a remote hearing would eliminate travel time for witnesses.
The Panel considered any concerns about control of any party or witness in a remote location. They noted that there are no facts in dispute in this case, and that the witnesses are only speaking to the Teacher's fitness to teach. It was also noted that there was nothing in the papers that raised concerns. Whilst the volume of documentation is extensive, the Panel noted that there are no allegations in dispute and witnesses would only be provided with the documentation relevant to them.
The Panel was satisfied that evidence could be sufficiently assessed in a remote hearing. They noted that the remote hearing was notopposed by eitherparty and that no concerns had been raised by parties about evidence being assessed remotely. It was also noted that the hearing will start at stage 2, and no stage 1 evidence will require to be assessed.
The Panel did not identify any practical difficulties in managing public access to hearing. They agreed that there are systems in place for public hearings and that the public would not be privy to any private meetings.
- What are the benefits of a remote hearing balanced against the drawbacks?
The Panel noted that the Teacher no longer lives in Scotland, and that a remote hearing would save time and expense. They also agreed that a remote hearing would save witnesses time and expense.
The Panel agreed that in this case there were no drawbacks to the hearing being conducted remotely. They noted that the Teacher requested a remote hearing, and that the Presenting Officer did not object.
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 Remote Hearings and Remote Witnesses 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. It was noted by the Panel that the application is not opposed by the Presenting Officer and that no drawbacks of the hearing being conducted remotely were identified.
Accordingly, the Panel granted the application for the hearing to take place remotely.
