Ms Cathryn Williams

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

Teacher's name: Ms Cathryn Williams

Teacher reference number: 3760506

Teacher's date of birth: 21 February 1965

Location teacher worked: East Sussex, South East England

Date of professional conduct panel: 1 to 4 July 2024

Outcome type: prohibition order

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 Ms Cathryn Williams, formerly employed in East Sussex, South East England.

Teacher misconduct

Ground Floor, South

Cheylesmore House

5 Quinton RoadCoventryCV1 2WT

Email TRA.Casework@education.gov.uk

Telephone 020 7593 5393

Information about regulating the teaching profession and the process for dealing with serious teacher misconduct.

Ms Cathryn Williams: Professional conduct panel outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education July 2024 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Preliminary applications 5 Summary of evidence 6 Documents 6 Witnesses 7 Decision and reasons 7 Findings of fact 8 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 17 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 20 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Ms Cathryn Williams Teacher ref number: 3760506 Teacher date of birth: 21 February 1965 TRA reference: 22395 Date of determination: 4 July 2024 Former employer: Uplands Academy, East Sussex Introduction A professional conduct panel (‘the panel’) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (‘the TRA’) convened on 1 to 4 July 2024 by way of a virtual hearing, to consider the case of Ms Cathryn Williams. The panel members were Mr Paul Millett (lay panellist – in the chair), Mrs Erin Sudds (teacher panellist) and Mrs Beverley Montgomery (lay panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mr Benjamin Lewins of Birketts LLP solicitors. The presenting officer for the TRA was Miss Fallon Alexis of QEB Hollis Whiteman, instructed by Kingsley Napley LLP. Ms Williams was present for part of the hearing and was not represented. The hearing took place by way of a virtual hearing in public (save for parts which were heard in private) and was recorded. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of hearing dated 19 April 2024, as amended upon application of the TRA at a case management hearing on 27 June 2024. It was alleged that Ms Williams was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, in that: 1. On or around 8 April 2022, she completed an application form for a teaching post where she answered ‘no’ in response to the questions below, when this was incorrect: a) Have you ever been the subject of any allegations in relation to the safety and welfare of children, either substantiated or unsubstantiated; b) Have you ever received a final warning for misconduct or incompetence or have you received a lesser warning which has not time expired at the point of making this application. 2. Between around June 2022 to October 2022, she exchanged inappropriate and/or over-familiar WhatsApp messages with Pupil A, a pupil at a previous school she worked at; 3. Between around June 2022 to October 2022, she had an inappropriate and/or over- familiar relationship with Pupil A, a pupil at a previous school she worked at, in that she arranged to meet up with Pupil A on or around 28 October 2022; 4. She did not safeguard Pupil A, a pupil at a previous school she worked at in that she did not report her concerns to the Designated Safeguarding Lead and/or appropriate person at her previous school in a timely manner and/or at all; 5. Her conduct at paragraph 1 was: a) Dishonest; and/or b) Lacked integrity. The panel noted that Ms Williams admitted allegations 1(a), 2, 3, 4 and 5, and denied allegation 1(b), as set out in the statement of agreed facts signed by Ms Williams on the 4 April 2024 and by the presenting officer on the 6 March 2024. 5 Preliminary applications Application to amend allegations The presenting officer made an application to amend allegation 4 as follows: • From “You did not safeguard Pupil A, a pupil at a previous school you worked at in that you did not report your concerns to the Designated Safeguarding Lead and/or appropriate person at your previous school in a timely manner and/or at all” to “You did not safeguard Pupil A, a pupil at a previous school you worked at in that between around June 2022 to October 2022 you did not report your concerns to the Designated Safeguarding Lead and/or appropriate person at your previous school in a timely manner and/or at all”. The panel noted that teacher had not been informed of the proposed changes to the allegations in advance of the hearing. The panel was advised that it had the power to amend allegations in accordance with paragraph 5.83 of the Teacher misconduct: Disciplinary procedures for the teaching profession May 2020 (“the Procedures”). The panel considered that the proposed amendments would not change the nature of the allegations in that the allegations would still relate to allegations of a failure to report safeguarding concerns relating to Pupil A. Ms Williams did not oppose the application. The panel considered the proposed amendments simply clarified the relevant time period which allegation 4 was concerned with and that they had the effect of narrowing the allegation. The panel heard representations from the presenting officer that the proposed amendment properly captured the TRA’s intention at all times and was therefore a point of clarification rather than a material change. The panel considered the proposed amendment would assist the teacher in putting forward her best case in response to the allegation and the panel in determining the issue, by focusing the parties’ minds on a discreet period of time. The legal adviser drew the panel’s attention to the case of Dr Bashir Ahmedsowida v General Medical Council [2021] EWHC 3466 (Admin), 2021 WL 06064095 which held that the lateness of amendments did not necessarily mean they were unjust, as acknowledged in the previous case of Professional Standards Authority v Health and Care Professions Council and Doree [2017] EWCA Civ 319 at [56]. Whilst Ms Williams had misunderstood the allegation in part, Ms Williams had responded to the allegation as amended in her statement admitted in the late papers bundle and the panel decided the teacher was always aware of the substance of the allegation. The panel considered that Ms Williams would have presented her case differently but only in so far as she would have been more succinct in her response, but otherwise her case 6 would have been presented in the same manner had the amendment been made earlier. The panel therefore determined that there would be no unfairness or prejudice caused by granting the application and that it was in the interests of justice to do so. Accordingly, the panel did grant this application and considered the amended allegations, which are set out above. Application to proceed in the absence of the teacher Ms Williams attended the hearing from 1 July 2024 to 3 July 2024, inclusive. Ms Williams informed the panel that she would not be attending on 4 July 2024 as [REDACTED]. The presenting officer made an application to proceed in her absence. Ms Williams did not object to this. The panel accepted the legal advice provided in relation to this application and took account of the various factors referred to it, as derived from the guidance set down in the case of R v Jones [2003] 1 AC 1 (as considered and applied in subsequent cases, particularly GMC v Adeogba). The panel was satisfied that the notice of hearing had been sent to Ms Williams in accordance with the Procedures. The panel noted Ms Williams was voluntarily absenting herself in circumstances in which she had been warned that one potential consequence was that the panel may grant an application to proceed in her absence and that she did not object to this application and had plainly waived her right to be present. The panel also considered the risk of reaching the wrong conclusion to be low. The panel had heard all oral evidence and Ms Williams had cross-examined the TRA’s witnesses and made representations throughout and a closing statement. The panel also invited Ms Williams to submit written representations on sanction, to be disclosed to the panel only if the question of sanction became relevant. Therefore, the panel considered it was in the public interest to proceed in Ms Williams’ absence on 4 July 2024. Having decided that it was appropriate to proceed, the panel agreed to seek to ensure that the proceedings were as fair as possible in the circumstances, bearing in mind that M s Williams was not present. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the hearing, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: 7 • Section 1: Chronology, key people list and anonymised Person list– pages 4 to 6 • Section 2: Notice of proceedings and response to notice of hearing – pages 7 to 19 • Section 3: TRA witness statements – pages 20 to 31 • Section 4: TRA documents – pages 32 to 704 • Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 705 to 736 • A separate late papers bundle which the panel decided to admit during the case management hearing on 27 June 2024– pages 1 to 32. The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents within the bundle, in advance of the hearing and the additional documents that the panel decided to admit. Witnesses The panel heard oral evidence from the following witnesses called by the TRA: • Mother A • Witness B, [REDACTED] • Witness C, [REDACTED] Decision and reasons The panel announced its decision and reasons as follows: The panel carefully considered the case before it and reached a decision. On the 13 July 2021, Ms Williams received a formal letter of concern from Hastings Academy based on two incidents. On the 21 October 2021, Ms Williams received an informal letter confirming the outcome of the investigation from Hastings Academy. On the 8 April 2022, Ms Williams completed a job application for Beacon Community Academy Trust ('Beacon Academy’). Ms Williams later consented to Beacon Academy passing this application form to Uplands Community College (which is now Uplands Academy) for consideration for another job role. On the 19 May 2022, Ms Williams resigned from Hastings Academy. 8 On the 13 June 2022, Ms Williams began employment as a geography teacher