TRA Hearing – Sexual activity with a child – All allegations dismissed.

The Client

Our client, an experienced and retired teacher, faced allegations of serious misconduct said to have occurred during their time at a school between 1998 and 2001.

The Allegations

The Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) alleged that our client had engaged in an inappropriate and sexual relationship with a pupil. This included claims that the teacher had given gifts, shared personal information, and engaged in sexual intercourse and/or sexualised behaviour.

It was further alleged that such conduct was sexually motivated and amounted to unacceptable professional conduct or conduct likely to bring the profession into disrepute.

Our Work and Defence Strategy

We were instructed to act on behalf of the teacher and, in advance of the hearing, prepared a detailed skeleton argument challenging the TRA’s attempt to rely on hearsay evidence from third parties, including a foster parent.

Our submissions were grounded in fairness and fundamental procedural rights. We emphasised that the right to a fair hearing includes the ability to test evidence through cross-examination, and that hearsay should only be admitted in limited circumstances. In this case, the TRA had failed to provide any cogent justification for relying on hearsay rather than securing live evidence.

We further demonstrated that the proposed evidence was inherently unreliable and carried a real risk of prejudice. It originated from individuals with potential animosity towards our client and could not be properly tested. Given the seriousness of the allegations and the potential for a prohibition order, it was essential that the Panel confined itself to evidence that was fair, reliable, and capable of scrutiny.

The Panel accepted these submissions and refused to admit the hearsay evidence.

TRA Hearing Outcome

The matter proceeded to a full five-day hearing before a Professional Conduct Panel. The Panel heard live evidence from the complainant, social workers, and other witnesses, alongside the teacher’s own testimony and supporting material.

Having considered the evidence in detail, the Panel found that there was no sufficient evidence that gifts had been provided, no proper evidential basis linking the sharing of personal information to any alleged sexual relationship, and no credible or reliable evidence to support the claims of sexual intercourse or sexualised behaviour.

The Panel identified significant inconsistencies in the complainant’s account, noted the historic nature of the allegations, and placed weight on the absence of corroborative evidence. It ultimately concluded that the allegations were fanciful and not proven.

At the conclusion of the hearing, none of the allegations were found proven. The Panel determined that our client had not engaged in any inappropriate or sexual relationship with a pupil and made no findings of unacceptable professional conduct.

Our client was therefore fully exonerated, avoiding both any finding of misconduct and the

Comment from Jared McNally

“This case illustrates the necessity of challenging hearsay evidence and unreliable witness testimony in regulatory proceedings. The TRA’s attempt to rely on such evidence was properly rejected. After a five-day hearing, none of the allegations were proven – a complete vindication for our client. Allegations of this seriousness demand rigorous testing, and any attempt to short-cut fairness must be robustly opposed.”

Clifford Johnston & Co is a leading firm in Criminal Defence and Regulatory Law, based in Manchester and representing clients across England and Wales on a privately funded basis. We provide strategic advice and robust advocacy when your professional career is under TRA investigation or at risk