Anwar v National College for Teaching & Leadership & Anor

An appeal under regulation 17 of the Teachers’ Disciplinary (England) Regulations 2012 is by way of rehearing. The court must reach its own view, while respecting appropriate factual and professional expertise. Where disciplinary proceedings concerning an alleged agreement or course of conduct are split between related participants, the prosecuting authority must disclose material from the other proceedings which may assist the appellant or damage its own case. This duty is not displaced because the appellant could obtain or serve evidence independently. Failure to disclose material evidence capable of affecting the findings may amount to a serious procedural irregularity making the proceedings unjust.

The appellants, teachers at Park View School, appealed under regulation 17 of the Teachers’ Disciplinary (England) Regulations 2012 against findings of unacceptable professional conduct and recommendations for indefinite prohibition from teaching. The proceedings concerned an alleged agreement to introduce an undue amount of religious influence into the education of pupils.

Related proceedings against members of the school’s senior leadership team and other teachers were heard separately. The appellants argued that material disclosed in the senior leadership proceedings, including witness statements, expert reports and an email concerning one alleged participant, should have been disclosed to them. The central issue was whether the failure to disclose that material made the disciplinary proceedings unjust.

1. Appeal standard. The appeals were governed by CPR 52.11(3). An appeal under regulation 17 was by way of rehearing. The court therefore had to reach its own view on whether the decision was wrong, while remaining reluctant to interfere with factual findings and respecting the professional expertise of the Panel. The approach was consistent with O v Secretary of State for Education [2014] EWHC 22 (Admin) and Cheatle v GMC [2009] EWHC 645 (Admin).
2. The NCTL was entitled to conduct related proceedings separately. However, having chosen to pursue the appellants separately from other alleged participants, it was obliged to disclose material from the related proceedings which might assist the appellants’ case or damage its own. The Panel should have directed disclosure if it was not made voluntarily.
3. The senior leadership witness statements were not mere denials. They contained relevant background, accounts of the alleged conduct and evidence concerning the alleged agreement. Their common denial of the same alleged agreement was itself relevant. The expert reports were also relevant to the major issue of what constituted an undue amount of religious influence. The appellants’ ability to obtain their own expert evidence did not remove the disclosure obligation.
4. An email from Mr Faraz was capable of supporting the contention that he did not have the improper agenda alleged by the NCTL. The Panel could not fairly assess that issue while unaware of the email, Mr Faraz’s written statement and the transcript of his evidence.
5. The failure to disclose this material, and the Panel’s failure to order disclosure, constituted a sufficiently serious procedural irregularity to render the proceedings unjust. Both appeals were allowed and the prohibition orders were set aside. The court left any question of a new hearing and consequential matters for further argument.

1. Professional conduct Panel: On 9 February 2016, the Panel found each appellant guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and bringing the teaching profession into disrepute, and recommended indefinite prohibition orders subject to review periods.
2. Secretary of State for Education: On 11 February 2016, the Secretary of State accepted the recommendations and made prohibition orders taking effect on 18 February 2016.
3. High Court (Administrative Court): The appeals were allowed under regulation 17. The prohibition orders were set aside because serious procedural irregularities made the proceedings unjust.