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:
ď‚§ 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
ď‚§ 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.
ď‚§ 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
Loading comments...