Headteacher loses appeal against ban for Amazon purchases using school account

A headteacher found to have spent school funds on martini glasses, champagne flutes and a giant Jenga set has lost an appeal against a ban from the profession.

Mr Justice Sweeting, in the High Court, dismissed all the points advanced by Kanchana Vanhove as to why the Secretary of State for Education and Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) should not have imposed a ban on her teaching, subject to a review after two years.

Ms Vanhove was headteacher at Wareside Church of England Primary School in Hertfordshire where the TRA alleged she made unauthorised purchases and submitted inappropriate or unauthorised expense claims using school funds.

These were made through the school's Amazon and bank accounts and Ms Vanhove maintained that these purchases were for the benefit of the school, while the TRA said they were for personal use.

She argued that the professional conduct panel that heard her case had made a serious miscarriage of justice with findings of fact inconsistent with the evidence and based on speculation.

Ms Vanhove also claimed the panel was wrong to refuse to dismiss the allegations at the close of the TRA's case and that it reversed the burden of proof.

In May 2019, the school’s deputy headteacher, approached the chair of governors with a whistleblowing disclosure concerning misappropriation of school funds.

An audit found sufficient concerns for Ms Vanhove to be suspended the following month.

The panel found her purchases from the school’s Amazon account had included four sets of 16 large clear plastic Martini cocktail glasses, two croquet sets, 30 champagne flutes, a giant Jenga set and a bike computer.

It found she had made these purchases for her personal used and deemed “implausible”a claim that the martini glasses were for an event for headteachers at the school.

Sweeting J said:”The appellant's appeal is essentially an attack on the panel's findings of fact…however, she does not identify any legal errors made by the panel, nor any serious procedural irregularity in the conduct of the hearing.”

The judge found the panel had sufficient evidence to reach the conclusions it did, took a careful approach and had been entitled to make the findings of fact about Ms Vanhove’s credibility. It had also not reversed the burden of proof.

The prohibition order on for former headteacher would remain in force subject to the appellant’s entitlement to a review.

Mark Smulian