Account login is temporarily disabled while we improve the platform. All court data remains fully accessible.
Back to Teacher Regulation Directory
Teaching Regulation Agency

Mrs Rebecca Horgan

Teacher Reference Number: N/A

Panel Outcome Decided: A professional conduct panel concluded its investigation on this case. See the details and full decision document below for the outcome.

Teacher Record Details

Teacher's Name
Mrs Rebecca Horgan
Teacher Reference Number
N/A
Date of Birth
N/A
Location Employed
Kingswinford, West Midlands
Professional Panel Date
insert dates of hearing 3 December 2025
Agency Outcome Decision
no order made
Decision Published Date
5 January 2026

Panel Decision & Reasons Summary

The Secretary of State does not make these decisions themselves. They are made by a senior official on the recommendation of an independent panel.

Teacher's name: Mrs Rebecca Horgan

Location teacher worked: Kingswinford, West Midlands

Date of professional conduct panel: insert dates of hearing 3 December 2025

Outcome type: no order made

Notice is hereby given that, in accordance with The Teacher's’ Disciplinary (England) Regulations 2012, a professional conduct panel was convened to consider the case of Mrs Rebecca Horgan, formerly employed in Kingswinford, West Midlands.

Full PDF Document Transcript Search

Mrs Rebecca Horgan: Professional conduct panel outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education December 2025 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Summary of evidence 4 Documents 4 Witnesses 4 Decision and reasons 5 Findings of fact 5 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 7 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 9 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mrs Rebecca Horgan TRA reference: 24177 Date of determination: 3 December 2025 Former employer: Glynne Primary School, Kingswinford Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened on 3 December 2025 by way of a virtual hearing, to consider the case of Mrs Rebecca Horgan. The panel members were Ms Jan Stoddard (lay panellist – in the chair), Mr Ben Greene (teacher panellist) and Mr Steven Boocock (lay panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mr Graham Miles of Blake Morgan LLP solicitors. The presenting officer for the TRA was Ms Charlotte Watts of Browne Jacobson LLP solicitors. Mrs Horgan was present and was represented by Mr James Halliday of Counsel. The hearing was recorded and took place in public save that portions of the hearing were heard in private. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of hearing dated 1 September 2025. It was alleged that Mrs Horgan was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute in that whilst employed as a class teacher at Glynne Primary School: 1) On or around 17 January 2024, she: a) Brought alcohol onto school premises; b) Consumed alcohol on school premises, during working hours; c) Was inebriated on school premises, during working hours. Mrs Horgan admitted the facts alleged and admitted that they amounted to unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the hearing, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Chronology – pages 6 to 7 Section 2: Notice of hearing – pages 9 to 21 Section 3: Teaching Regulation Agency documents– pages 23 to 85 Section 4: Teacher documents – pages 87 to 152 Section 5: Statement of agreed facts – pages 154 to 156 The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents within the bundle, in advance of the hearing. In the consideration of this case, the panel had regard to the document Teacher misconduct: Disciplinary procedures for the teaching profession 2020, (the “Procedures”). Witnesses No witnesses were called by the TRA. Mrs Rebecca Horgan gave evidence at the sanction stage. 5 Decision and reasons The panel announced its decision and reasons as follows: The panel carefully considered the case before it and reached a decision. Mrs Horgan was a nursery teacher at Glynne Primary School. On 17 January 2024 at about 12.30pm, she returned to the nursery having been out, and two nursery teaching assistants saw her behaving unusually. She was unsteady on her feet and fell onto the floor, her speech was slurred and unclear, and her eyes were red. A colleague looked into Mrs Horgan’s bag, to fetch her water bottle, and saw a bottle of vodka inside the bag. She reported what she had seen to the headteacher, who spoke to Mrs Horgan. Mrs Horgan admitted having consumed alcohol. She continued to behave unusually and remained unsteady on her feet. [REDATED] The headteacher arranged for [REDACTED] to collect Mrs Horgan. A colleague later found an empty vodka bottle in a school cupboard. Mrs Horgan admitted the factual allegations against her and signed a statement of agreed facts to that effect. Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows: 1) On or around 17 January 2024, you: a) Brought alcohol onto school premises; Mrs Horgan admitted the allegation. In the statement of agreed facts, Mrs Horgan admitted that she left the School during her lunch hour, purchased a bottle of alcohol and brought it with her onto the School premises. The panel found allegation 1a proved. b) Consumed alcohol on school premises, during working hours; Mrs Horgan admitted the allegation. In the statement of agreed facts, Mrs Horgan admitted that she consumed the bottle of alcohol while conducting Planning, Preparation and Assessment time on the School premises during teaching hours. The panel found allegation 1b proved. c) Were inebriated on school premises, during working hours. 6 Mrs Horgan admitted the allegation. In the statement of agreed facts, Mrs Horgan admitted that she became inebriated while on the School premises during teaching hours. The panel found allegation 1c proved. Findings as to unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute Having found all of the allegations proved, the panel went on to consider whether the facts of those proven allegations amounted to unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. In doing so, the panel had regard to the document Teacher misconduct: The prohibition of teachers, which is referred to as “the Advice”. The panel first considered whether the conduct of Mrs Horgan, in relation to the facts found proved, involved breaches of the Teachers’ Standards. The panel considered that, by reference to Part 2, Mrs Horgan was in breach of the following standards:  Teachers uphold public trust in the profession and maintain high standards of ethics and behaviour, within and outside school, by o treating pupils with dignity, building relationships rooted in mutual respect, and at all times observing proper boundaries appropriate to a teacher’s professional position o having regard for the need to safeguard pupils’ well-being, in accordance with statutory provisions  Teachers must have proper and professional regard for the ethos, policies and practices of the school in which they teach and maintain high standards in their own attendance and punctuality.  Teachers must have an understanding of, and always act within, the statutory frameworks which set out their professional duties and responsibilities. The panel also considered whether Mrs Horgan’s conduct displayed behaviours associated with any of the offences listed on pages 12 and 13 of the Advice. The Advice indicates that where behaviours associated with such an offence exist, a panel is likely to conclude that an individual’s conduct would amount to unacceptable professional conduct. The panel found that none of these offences was relevant. The panel was satisfied that the conduct of Mrs Horgan amounted to misconduct of a serious nature which fell significantly short of the standards expected of the profession. 7 Accordingly, the panel was satisfied that Mrs Horgan was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct. In relation to whether Mrs Horgan’s actions amounted to conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, the panel took into account the way the teaching profession is viewed by others. It considered the influence that teachers may have on pupils, parents and others in the community. The panel also took account of the uniquely influential role that teachers can hold in pupils’ lives and the fact that pupils must be able to view teachers as role models in the way that they behave. The panel considered that Mrs Horgan’s conduct could potentially damage the public’s perception of a teacher. For these reasons, the panel found Mrs Horgan’s actions constituted conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State Given the panel’s findings in respect of unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, it was necessary for the panel to go on to consider whether it would be appropriate to recommend the imposition of a prohibition order by the Secretary of State. In considering whether to recommend to the Secretary of State that a prohibition order should be made, the panel had to consider whether it would be an appropriate and proportionate measure, and whether it would be in the public interest to do so. Prohibition orders should not be given in order to be punitive, or to show that blame has been apportioned, although they are likely to have punitive effect. The panel had regard to the particular public interest considerations set out in the Advice and, having done so, found a number of them to be relevant in this case, namely: the safeguarding and wellbeing of pupils, the protection of other members of the public, the maintenance of public confidence in the profession and declaring and upholding proper standards of conduct. There was a strong public interest consideration in respect of the safeguarding and wellbeing of pupils. Similarly, the panel considered that public confidence in the profession could be seriously weakened if conduct such as that found against Mrs Horgan were not treated with the utmost seriousness when regulating the conduct of the profession. 8 The panel was of the view that a strong public interest consideration in declaring proper standards of conduct in the profession was also present as the conduct found against Mrs Horgan was outside that which could reasonably be tolerated. In addition to the public interest considerations set out above, the panel went on to consider whether there was a public interest in retaining Mrs Horgan in the profession. The panel decided that there was a public interest consideration in retaining Mrs Horgan in the profession, since no doubt had been cast upon her abilities as an educator and there was evidence to show that she is able

Discussion Board

Loading comments...