THE former assistant headteacher of a Cheshire school who chased a pupil on a sports field and squirted her with water will be allowed to keep teaching, a panel has ruled.

The Teaching Regulation Agency professional conduct panel ruled that James Dathan, formerly employed as assistant headteacher and head of mathematics at Neston High School, had failed to maintain appropriate professional boundaries towards a pupil referred to as 'Pupil A' on more than one occasion.

The panel, following a three-day hearing earlier this month, ruled that the breaches of the Teachers Standards, which happened between 2017 and 2019, "amounted to misconduct of a serious nature which fell significantly short of the standards expected of the profession, particularly in the context of repeated warnings", and Mr Dathan was "guilty of unacceptable professional conduct" and "conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute".

However, the panel said while Mr Dathan’s behaviour was at times "over-familiar, playful and inappropriate", it added it "did not consider that this necessarily amounted to 'flirtatious' behaviour, particularly given its connotations with behaviour that was in some way of a sexual nature or was motivated by sexual intent."

Mr Dathan had categorically denied there was any sexual motivation to his actions.

Sarah Buxcey, making the final decision on behalf of the Secretary of State, agreed with the recommendations of the panel that Mr Dathan should not be made the subject of a prohibition order, which would have prevented him from teaching.

The panel, chaired by Hilary Jones, heard Mr Dathan had been employed at the school since January 1, 2013.

In July 2019, a member of the staff at the school reported the incident of Mr Dathan chasing Pupil A on a sports field and squirting her with water, as well as touching her on more than one occasion on her back.

The school began an investigation. On September 14 that year, Mr Dathan had resigned.

On October 4, the school's disciplinary meeting concluded if Mr Dathan had not resigned, he would have been dismissed on the grounds of gross misconduct.

Mr Dathan had accepted all these allegations and they were found proved.

This had followed advice and/or warnings Mr Dathan had received in relation to his conduct towards Pupil A and/or the need to maintain appropriate professional boundaries with pupils on four separate occasions between September 2017 and August 2018.

The panel had considered whether Mr Dathan's behaviour in the allegations was flirtatious, but did not conclude it was.

In Mr Dathan's defence, the panel had concluded he was remorseful and the incident happened over a course of minutes, and there was not an ongoing risk.

The panel added: "There was a strong public interest consideration in retaining Mr Dathan in the profession, since no doubt had been cast upon his abilities as a teacher and mentor to other teachers, as well as his abilities to engage with challenging students.

"No doubt was cast upon Mr Dathan’s ability to make a valuable contribution to the profession in a specialist subject. The panel had particular regard to the numerous character references and other evidence which supported this, and the TRA’s acknowledgement of Mr Dathan’s excellent teaching abilities."

It added: "There was no evidence to suggest that Mr Dathan was acting under duress; however, the panel acknowledged the demands he was under at the time of the incident resulting from a high workload...there were no ill intentions in his actions.

"The panel also acknowledged that with the exception of this Pupil A, no issues had been raised in respect of Mr Dathan maintaining professional boundaries with students despite his significant pastoral responsibilities over a number of years, for which he was highly praised in character statements presented to the panel.

"Mr Dathan had a previously good record and the panel accepted that the incident was out of character.

"The panel also acknowledged that he had admitted his conduct promptly and had always co-operated with investigations. He was candid before the panel and admitted his mistakes."

Ms Buxcey, on behalf of the Secretary of State, said: "The panel finds that the conduct of Mr Dathan fell significantly short of the standards expected of the profession.

"The panel decided that there was a strong public interest consideration in retaining Mr Dathan in the profession, since no doubt had been cast upon his abilities as a teacher and mentor to other teachers, as well as his abilities to engage with challenging students.

"No doubt was cast upon Mr Dathan’s ability to make a valuable contribution to the profession in a specialist subject.

"A prohibition order would prevent Mr Dathan from teaching. A prohibition order would also clearly deprive the public of his contribution to the profession for the period that it is in force.

"For these reasons, I have concluded that a prohibition order is not proportionate and not in the public interest.

"I agree with the panel that the publication of the adverse findings it has made would be sufficient to send an appropriate message to the teacher as to the standards of behaviour that were not acceptable and that the publication would meet the public interest requirement of declaring proper standards of the profession."