Last reviewed by Jonathan Meadows (Solicitor, Regulation Resolution) on 21 July 2026.
Quick answer. A run of Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) appeals has reached the Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) in 2026 — including SA v DBS [2026] UKUT 232 (AAC), MK v DBS [2026] UKUT 159 (AAC), JG v DBS [2026] UKUT 131 (AAC), OJO v DBS [2026] UKUT 29 (AAC) and Mrs B v DBS [2026] UKUT 14 (AAC). The decisions confirm three things: the DBS must give you a genuine opportunity to make representations before barring you (OJO); it is bound by findings the tribunal has already made if a case comes back a second time (SA); but procedural challenges have limits — there is no automatic right to repeated chances to file fresh medical evidence (MK). If you are on, or at risk of being placed on, the adults’ or children’s barred list, these cases shape how to challenge the decision.
Being placed on the DBS barred list is one of the most serious administrative decisions the state can make about a working person. It ends careers in health, care and education, and unlike many regulatory sanctions it is indefinite unless successfully challenged. Appeals go to the Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber), with permission, on the ground that the DBS has made a mistake of law or fact. Reported decisions are relatively scarce — which is why the cluster of appeals decided in the first half of 2026 deserves attention from anyone who has received a “minded to bar” letter or a barring decision.
OJO v DBS: you must be given the chance to respond
In OJO v DBS [2026] UKUT 29 (AAC) (decided 16 December 2025), the Upper Tribunal quashed a barring decision because the appellant had been included on the barred lists without a proper opportunity to make representations. Judge Johnston held that the DBS erred in law by barring her in those circumstances — a straightforward but important application of procedural fairness. The right to make representations before a final barring decision is not a formality: it is the core protection in the barring scheme, and a decision made without it is vulnerable on appeal (read the decision).
Practical point. If you receive a “minded to bar” letter, the representations you make at that stage are your principal opportunity to prevent barring — and if the DBS short-circuits that process, OJO shows the decision can be quashed. Either way, specialist help with representations is critical.
SA v DBS: the DBS cannot rewrite findings on a second pass
SA v DBS [2026] UKUT 232 (AAC) (22 June 2026) concerned a former healthcare assistant whose case returned to the DBS after an earlier successful appeal. The first tribunal had found the incidents — arising from intimate care of vulnerable residents — involved no sexual intent, though the conduct had caused distress. On remittal, the DBS departed from those findings and reached new factual conclusions of its own. The Upper Tribunal allowed the appeal again: the DBS is bound by the tribunal’s earlier findings of fact, and principles akin to issue estoppel prevent matters already determined from being relitigated without special circumstances. The case was remitted for a fresh decision based on the findings of both tribunals (read the decision).
For anyone in a long-running barring dispute, SA is significant: a successful appeal is not a reset button for the DBS. What the tribunal has decided in your favour stays decided.
MK and JG: the limits of procedural challenge
The 2026 decisions are not all one way. In MK v DBS [2026] UKUT 159 (AAC) (4 April 2026), the appellant argued that the DBS should have given a further opportunity to file medical evidence of improved mental health before barring. Judge Mitchell dismissed the appeal: fairness did not require the DBS to keep the door open indefinitely for additional evidence (read the decision). And in JG v DBS [2026] UKUT 131 (AAC) (19 March 2026), the tribunal dismissed an appeal on the basis that the barring decision involved no mistake of fact and no material error of law (read the decision). A further decision in the cluster, Mrs B v DBS [2026] UKUT 14 (AAC), completes the picture of an unusually active period.
The message from MK and JG is that the Upper Tribunal polices genuine errors, not disappointments. An appeal needs an identifiable mistake of law or fact — put your best evidence in at the representations stage, because you may not get a second chance to file it.
What this means if you are facing a DBS barring decision
- Treat the “minded to bar” letter as the decisive stage. Representations are where barring is most often prevented, and where your full evidence — medical, testimonial, contextual — must go in (MK).
- Procedural fairness is enforceable. If the DBS barred you without a proper opportunity to respond, the decision can be quashed (OJO).
- Favourable findings stick. If a tribunal has found facts in your favour, the DBS cannot depart from them on a rehearing (SA).
- Appeals need errors, not unhappiness. Permission requires an arguable mistake of law or fact (JG) — a specialist assessment of the decision letter is the first step.
How we help. Regulation Resolution acts for professionals at every stage of the barring process — responding to minded to bar letters, seeking removal from the adults’ or children’s barred list, and appealing DBS decisions to the Upper Tribunal through our Disclosure and Barring Service team. If you have received correspondence from the DBS, contact us before you respond.
Frequently asked questions
Can you appeal a DBS barring decision?
Yes. With the Upper Tribunal’s permission, you can appeal on the ground that the DBS made a mistake of law or a mistake in the findings of fact on which the decision was based. The 2026 decisions show both successful appeals (OJO, SA) and unsuccessful ones (MK, JG).
What is a minded to bar letter?
It is the DBS’s formal notice that it is considering placing you on the barred list, inviting your representations before a final decision. It is the single most important stage at which to put in evidence and arguments, ideally with specialist advice.
What is the difference between the adults’ barred list and the children’s barred list?
They are separate lists barring individuals from regulated activity with adults and with children respectively. A person can be placed on one or both, and each can be challenged.
Can I get removed from the DBS barred list?
In certain circumstances you can seek a review or removal, and a barring decision can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal. The route depends on how and when you were barred — take advice on which applies to you.
Does being barred by the DBS affect my professional registration?
Yes — a barring decision will almost always trigger scrutiny by your professional regulator (NMC, HCPC, GMC, GDC, GPhC or Social Work England), and vice versa. The two processes are separate and both need handling.