Phillipson overturns 1 in 12 verdicts in teacher misconduct cases

The education secretary has quietly overruled the proposed punishment in almost one in 12 recent teacher misconduct cases, prompting warnings that public trust in the process could be undermined. 

Officials acting on Bridget Phillipson’s behalf have changed the verdicts for 18 teachers over the past 12 months following Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) hearings, data obtained by Schools Week shows. 

The figure – 7 per cent of cases – is a record high and double the number of the previous year. 

Andrew Faux, of Lawyers for Teachers, warned that “overruling panels so often will inevitably undermine public trust in the process”.

It may also “lead some accused teachers to disengage on the basis that no matter how they present to the independent panel, the sanction will be decided by a civil servant whom they never meet.

“We hope that stakeholders, such as trade unions, are concerned by this development.”

More overturned

Panels of three people not employed by the Department for Education or the TRA consider teacher misconduct cases. 

If they conclude there is serious misconduct, they make a recommendation on whether the accused should be banned from teaching and the length of a review period before they can apply to rejoin.

But the final decision rests with a senior TRA official working on the secretary of state’s behalf. 

Figures obtained through the freedom of information act show the education secretary’s representative overruled the panel 18 times in 2025-26, the most since 2021-22. 

Seven of the 18 had a prohibition order imposed when the panel did not recommend one. 

Three others faced a longer review period, while four teachers were permanently banned.

‘Nothing’s changed’

Schools Week analysis also suggests 13 of the overturned recommendations in 2025-26 came after the new year. 

This came after Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, announced the launch of an “urgent review of the TRA’s processes and, in particular, the framework of delegations, thresholds and mitigations related to a decision to prohibit a teacher”. 

But the DfE this week insisted there “has been no change in its established processes or approach in its decision–making”.  

Cases where the official verdict differed from the panel’s recommendation “remain a small percentage of overall hearing outcomes”, the department added. 

Pepe Di’Iasio, the general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said the matter should be “closely monitored in line with principles of due process and a fair trial”. 

“A TRA panel, made up of education experts who are present throughout a hearing, are best placed to make a fair and informed judgment based on the evidence presented to them. 

“If decisions are later overturned by someone not as familiar with the details of the case, and who has not been present throughout the hearing, this could lead to an increase in High Court challenges and ultimately extend the time taken to conclude the case.”

What were the cases?

Our analysis of the 18 overturned cases suggests nine centred on allegations of inappropriate behaviour or conduct with pupils. 

Three others were for criminal convictions, two for alcohol misuse and two more were based on safeguarding failings.  

In February, Darlington teacher Samuel Everett was banned from teaching, with a two-year review period, after posting on social media remarks “related to immigration and gender”. This was despite the panel recommending against the issuing of a prohibition order. 

In one post, Everett said: “There’s not an Islamist problem in our country according to some. How many times do we get called racists for being English? 

“These people come from the most intolerable and barbaric places you can imagine and think they have more rights than us. Bore off.”

He was judged to have demonstrated “a lack of tolerance and a lack of respect for the rights and beliefs of others”. 

Through FOI, the DfE also revealed education secretaries have “always imposed a prohibition order in cases where the professional conduct panel has recommended one”. 

But since 2018, there have been 13 occasions where a shorter review period was imposed than the one recommended. 

Faux added: “We have always reassured teachers that TRA panels are fair–minded and independent and that the secretary of state usually follows their recommendation.  

“We have noted a sharp departure from the usual practice this year, and it is good to see that our ‘gut feel’ is proved correct by the diligent research by Schools Week.”