24-25/52

I refer to your request for information (FOI 24-25/52)dated 22 October2024 for records related to the cancellation of cases under the Fitness to Teach process which we have handled under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act (FOISA). Please see our response to your queries below.

Firstly, you asked “how many cases have been cancelled under the 2017 Rules where the referral was made while the 2017 rules were in force”. My colleagues within our Regulatory Investigations confirm that that there have been 5 cancellations since the Rules came into effect on 27 August 2017.

Secondly, you asked, how many involved a case where “the referral was made within 5 years of the most recent alleged misconduct”. In 4 cases, the referral was made within 5 years of the most recent alleged misconduct.

Thirdly, you asked, how many had been cancelled“ where the application for cancelation [sic] was made after a panel had decided to refer the case on for hearing proceedings under rule 2.3.2”. In 5 cases, the application for cancellation was made after the case was referred on for a Full Hearing.

Finally, you asked, how many involved a case “where the application to cancel cited the fact that five years had passed since the most recent alleged misconduct”. In 2 cases, the application for cancellation cited the fact that 5 years had passed.

You may contact informationgovernance@gtcs.org.uk if you are dissatisfied with this response, to request GTC Scotland conduct a review of it. You should describe the original request and explain your grounds of review. You have 40 working days from receipt of this response to submit a review request. When the review process has been completed, if you are still dissatisfied, you may use the Scottish Information Commissioner’s guidance on making an appeal to make an appeal to the Commissioner.

I refer to your request dated 19 November 2024 for a review of the response you received the same day to your original information request to GTC Scotland (FOI 24-25/52), dated 22 October 2024.

You have expressed dissatisfaction with our response to your information request. To enable your review request to be considered afresh and by someone who has not responded to your original request, I have been appointed to undertake the internal review on behalf of GTC Scotland.

Your original request 

In your original request you asked for the following:

How many cases have been cancelled under the 2017 Rules where:

• the referral was made while the 2017 rules were in force,‍
• and where the referral was made within five years of the most recent alleged misconduct,‍
• and where the application for cancelation was made after a panel had decided to refer the case on for hearing proceedings under rule 2.3.2‍
• and where the application to cancel cited the fact that five years had passed since the most recent alleged misconduct

On 22 October 2024, you sent an email requesting we review our decision in FOI 24-25/20 under section 20(1) of FOISA.

Your internal review request

In your review request of 23 September, you state:

What I was asking was in how many cases the four conditions were all met – I signalled this by given one question with four clauses conjoined with “and” in bold.

What you have told me is the number of cases meeting each condition.

Please could you respond letting me know the number of cases where all four conditions were met?

Please see our response to your request for an internal review below.

Our initial response

In response to your request, we provided the following information:

Firstly, you asked “how many cases have been cancelled under the 2017 Rules where the referral was made while the 2017 rules were in force”. My colleagues within our Regulatory Investigations confirm that that there have been 5 cancellations since the Rules came into effect on 27 August 2017.

Secondly, you asked, how many involved a case where “the referral was made within 5 years of the most recent alleged misconduct”. In 4 cases, the referral was made within 5 years of the most recent alleged misconduct. Thirdly, you asked, how many had been cancelled“ where the application for cancelation[sic] was made after a panel had decided to refer the case on for hearing proceedings under rule 2.3.2”. In 5 cases, the application for cancellation was made after the case was referred on for a Full Hearing.

Finally, you asked, how many involved a case “where the application to cancel cited the fact that five years had passed since the most recent alleged misconduct”. In 2 cases, the application for cancellation cited the fact that 5 years had passed.

Our response to this review request

I have considered the response which was provided to you. The response provided the figures for each criteria listed in your request, as you have highlighted, to allow you to see how many cases met each criteria. However, I note from the response that the number fulfilling all criteria listed was not included. Our apologies for not having provided that final figure.

To confirm, only 2 out of 5 cases fulfilled all the criteria you have set out.

If you are dissatisfied with this response to your review request, you have a right of appeal to the Scottish Information Commissioner within 6 month sof this review response. The Scottish Information Commissioner’s guidance on making an appeal describes the process, including the application form. Further information, including relevant contact details is available on the website. www.itspublicknowledge.info/Appeal. If you are dissatisfied with the decision of the Commissioner, following an appeal to the Commissioner, you have a right of appeal to the Court of Session on a point of law.