High Court agrees to DBS application for local authority to disclose findings made by Family Court

In X, Re [2025] EWFC 479 (27 November 2025), Mrs Justice Arbuthnot concluded that the Family Procedure Rules “make it clear that the DBS is a professional acting in the furtherance of the protection of children and the local authority is entitled therefore to disclose information about proceedings held in private under the Children Act 1989 (and other proceedings dealt with by the family court) to the DBS.”  

The application was brought by the DBS in July 2025 for a local authority to disclose to them the Family Court’s findings. 

The DBS was told by the local authority that there had been a fact finding and welfare hearing in respect of children of the family in 2021, and it sought to receive both the judgment and other relevant information generated by public law family proceedings relevant to their jurisdiction. 

The DBS is responsible for deciding, pursuant to the Safeguarding and Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 (SVGA 2006), whether individuals should or should not be placed on a list which prohibits individuals from undertaking "regulated activity" with either children, vulnerable adults or both groups.

The DBS was told by the police that X had been convicted of an offence of "causing or allowing a child or vulnerable adult to suffer serious physical harm", after they had applied to work in a role in early years which amounted to "regulated activity". 

As a result of this information, the DBS issued an "intention to bar letter", enabling X to make representations about whether they should be barred. 

Mrs Justice Arbuthnot said the offence for which X was convicted, fell, under the SVGA 2006 legislative scheme, as an "auto bar" offence with representations.  “Put shortly, this means that X may be placed on the barred list(s) given their offence (paragraphs 2 and 8 of Schedule 3 of the SVGA 2006), but they may make representations to the DBS as to why they should not be placed on that list before any barring decision is made.”

X made representations after receiving the "intention to bar letter". They acknowledged their conviction, but identified mitigating factors in respect of their mental health and their position as the victim of domestic abuse at the date of the offending, and identified that they should not be barred. 

Upon receipt of this information, the DBS sought to gather further information about the incident which led to X’s conviction and about the family proceedings.

The DBS contacted the local authority on two occasions. After the second occasion, the local authority informed the DBS that there had been a fact-finding hearing in public law family proceedings and that X had been found to have inflicted injuries to a child and that the partner had failed to protect the child. 

Following on from this, the DBS asked the local authority for a copy of that judgment - again on two occasions, the judge said. 

The local authority responded to say that it was “not entitled” to disclose the documentation as the DBS was not an organisation to which the authority could supply information under the Practice Direction to Part 12 of the Family Procedure Rules, Practice Direction 12G.

In response the DBS sent a further letter setting out the legislation and the relevant Family Procedure Rules and asking for the information to be disclosed. 

The local authority continued to say that it wanted a court order, leading to the DBS’ application to the High Court.

Turning to the application, the judge said: “The DBS relies upon the SVGA 2006 and the Regulations, along with the relevant rules of the FPR and says that it is entitled to have that information from the local authority once it has been requested. 

“I have been taken by [counsel for the DBS] through the various statutory provisions under the legislation and the FPR and I consider that its approach is the correct one and the local authority was wrong in its understanding of the SVGA, the Regulations and the FPR.”

The judge continued: “I consider that FPR 12.73(1)(a)(viii) read with FPR 2.3 make it clear that the DBS is a professional acting in the furtherance of the protection of children and the local authority is entitled therefore to disclose information about proceedings held in private under the Children Act 1989 (and other proceedings dealt with by the family court) to the DBS.  Section 12(4) of the AJA provides that it is not a contempt of court to disclose information where the rules of court authorise such.”

The High Court ordered the local authority to disclose the information to the DBS.

As an ancillary point, Mrs Justice Arbuthnot ordered the names of other children who were the subject of the family proceedings and of any other family members who may have been mentioned in the proceedings to be redacted by the local authority prior to the disclosure of the information, alongside the date of birth of the children of the family  - with their year of birth only set out in any information disclosed. 

Finally, the judge said: “There is a very limited list of individuals or bodies who are permitted to know whether someone is on the barred list for children and vulnerable adults, as set out at sections 43 - 53 of the SVGA 2006.  These are limited to those who may wish to employ the individual, to use them in a voluntary capacity which would amount to regulated activity or other regulatory bodies and the police. The DBS is not permitted to share information with those who are not directly involved in seeking to engage someone in regulated activity, or for example, with those who made the original referral to the DBS or who may have been the subject of the conduct which has given rise to the DBS considering whether to place the person upon the barred list.

“[…] In this case, it is highly likely that the parties will include those who would have no right to know of the barred status of one of the parties to the proceedings. 

“I therefore consider that the DBS has applied the correct approach in not notifying the parties to the family proceedings.  I trust that this judgment will be read by local authorities so that it is clear to them that, if asked, information should be disclosed to the DBS concerning family proceedings applying the law as set out above.”

Lottie Winson