Matthew Paul successfully represented the appellant, JP in her appeal against the suspension of her registration as a childminder before the Care Standards Tribunal.

JP is a childminder of over 20 years experience with an excellent professional record. In January, her son AP was diagnosed with schizophrenia, after a recent history of alcohol and drug abuse. AP experienced symptoms including hearing evil voices telling him to cut or stab himself, and compulsions (which he found himself able to resist) to hit his grandmother and parents. He was admitted to hospital as a result of his condition.

On learning of the diagnosis and symptoms, OFSTED suspended JP’s registration and issued a notice of their intention to cancel that registration. An occupational health specialist instructed by OFSTED judged that AP posed an unacceptable risk of harm to children in JP’s care.

At the Tribunal hearing, evidence was heard from three medical experts. A jointly instructed expert agreed with OFSTED’s doctor’s view that AP at present posed an unacceptable risk. AP’s own consultant psychiatrist gave evidence on behalf of the appellant, and considered that any risk he posed was low and acceptable.

Matthew Paul, on behalf of JP, submitted that Articles 6, 8 and 14 ECHR were engaged in JP’s case. The statutory test (whether the Tribunal reasonably believes that [AP] may expose children in JP’s care to a risk of harm) was as it stood too broad and in order to be proportionate, the test should be read not as ‘a risk’ but as ‘an unacceptable risk’.

The Tribunal accepted these submissions, and ruled that any risk posed by AP was in the circumstances acceptably low. The suspension was lifted and the appeal allowed.