Disclosure to the DBS

Local authorities should disclose prescribed information concerning family proceedings to the DBS, if requested by the latter.

The judgment in X, Re [2025] EWFC 479, which was handed down remotely on 27 November 2025 and formally released to the National Archives on 26 January 2026, followed an application brought by the Disclosure and Barring Service (“DBS”) on 24 July 2025. The question that flowed from that application was whether a local authority was required to disclose to the DBS the findings made by the Family Court following public law proceedings which took place in 2021 concerning a family. The DBS specifically requested, amongst other documents, the judgments relating to the fact-finding and welfare hearings.

Mrs Justice Arbuthnot, who dealt with the application and the hearing on 4 September 2025, highlighted the role and jurisdiction of the DBS within her judgment. In particular, the DBS is responsible for deciding 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 (as per paragraphs 3 and 9 of Schedule 3 of the Safeguarding and Vulnerable Groups Act 2006).

The DBS received information in 2024 that X had been convicted of an offence (causing or allowing a child or vulnerable adult to suffer physical harm pursuant to sections 5(1) and 5(8) of the Domestic Violence, Crime, and Victims Act 2004) after they had applied to work in a role in early years which amounted to “regulated activity”.

The DBS was therefore under a statutory duty to seek relevant information about the nature of the child protection or other concerns which may mean that the criteria is met to place the individual on the relevant barred list – the nature of the offence committed by X meant that it was an offence where barring would be automatic if representations were not made. The DBS does not undertake investigations itself, but relies upon, and has under the statutory scheme the power to seek information from various bodies – which includes a local authority (as per section 40 of the Safeguarding and Vulnerable Groups Act 2006). Interestingly, what seems clear under section 40(3) of that Act is that if the DBS requests a local authority to provide it with such prescribed information, “the local authority must comply” with that request.

The salient points that flow from the court’s decision are as follows:

1. 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.
2. Section 12(4) of the Administration of Justice Act 1960 provides that it is not a contempt of court to disclose information where the rules of court authorise such.
3. From looking at the legal frameworks set out above, it seems that local authorities have the ability to disclose under FPR 2010 and the duty to do so under SVGA 2006. In other words, a local authority both can and must do this if everything is read together.
4. No court application should be necessary in order to permit the local authority to discharge its duties in respect of DBS requests.
5. The court noted that the DBS asked the court to disclose the information. The court was of the view that it could order the information to be disclosed. However, the court felt that the better approach would be to order the local authority to disclose the information to the DBS given the legal framework set out above. The court had no doubt that such an order should be made and that the information should be disclosed.
6. 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 should be redacted by the local authority prior to the disclosure of this information, alongside the date of birth of the children of the family.
7. The parties to the family proceedings need not, and should not, be notified of the court application or request made by the DBS for prescribed information concerning family proceedings.

Dominik Morton is a specialist family law practitioner at St John’s Chambers, with a focus on public and private law children disputes. He regularly assists clients in highly emotional and complicated care proceedings. Dominik is regularly instructed to represent local authorities, parents and the children’s guardian at initial hearings, EPOs and ICOs through to contested multi-day final hearings and fact-finding hearings.