The Brought Justice Report, published on 4 November 2025, offers a sobering account of systemic safeguarding failures in Gwynedd. Despite clear statutory duties, established procedures, and repeated opportunities for intervention, abuse was allowed to continue unchecked for more than six years.
This review exposes an uncomfortable truth: safeguarding frameworks in Wales are robust on paper, yet their effectiveness depends entirely on the vigilance, accountability and professional integrity of those tasked with applying them. As with the Clywch Report two decades earlier, the message endures — children are protected not by policy alone, but by people willing to act.
This article, written by Huw Davies, a barrister at 30 Park Place chambers, explores where systems broke down, the legal obligations that should have prevented this harm, and the practical lessons that must now shape safeguarding practice across Wales.
On 4 November 2025, the Brought Justice Report [1] was published. It delivered a stark and sobering account of systemic failures and identified more than fifty missed opportunities to intervene and prevent Neil Foden, a school headteacher, from committing abuse against pupils during January 2017 to 30 September 2023. The Report exposed significant lapses in inter-agency communication, professional accountability, and the practical application of safeguarding duties.
The leader of Cyngor Gwynedd Council said the authority took responsibility for the mistakes and missed opportunities to stop Foden and apologised “to all those who have suffered”. It was also said that it was “now our duty as adults, professionals, politicians to rise to the challenge” and prevent a similar abuse from recurring.
The legal and procedural framework
Allegations and concerns relating to practitioners or individuals in positions of trust are governed by section 5 of the Welsh Safeguarding Procedures (2019) [2] which replaced part 4 of the All-Wales Child Protection Procedures (2008).
The Welsh Safeguarding Procedures (WSP) operationalises the duties required of individuals and places an emphasis on multi-agency cooperation, consistent practice, and arguably, proportionate decision-making. The WSP helps practitioners apply the Social Services and Wellbeing (Wales) Act 2014 [3] and the statutory safeguarding guidance Working Together to Safeguard People [4].
Importantly, the WSP extends beyond cases of demonstrable ‘significant harm’; it also applies when there is a legitimate question regarding an individual’s suitability to continue working with children or adults at risk – regardless of whether a criminal threshold has been met.
This approach strengthens the preventative capacity of safeguarding law in Wales and underscores the broader public interest duty embedded within it – a principle all relevant professionals in particular must not only be aware of, but apply.
Raising, recording and managing concerns
A duty to report requires that individuals and organisations must be able to raise concerns without fear of reprisal – no individual should feel isolated by virtue of reporting a concern. Not only is this a simple matter of workplace culture, but such a failing could also trigger contraventions of recognised employment law principles.
Children and young people must be empowered to speak without hesitation, and professionals must feel equally confident to report such concerns; even when doing so creates professional discomfort.
A previous negative reporting experience should also not give rise to general reluctance and a refusal to raise a similar and unrelated matter for the second or third time; as was the case in this instance.
Upon receiving a concern, the recipient has a duty to:
- Treat the information seriously and maintain an open and impartial mind.
- Refer the matter appropriately, ensuring that the concern is not shared with the subject of the allegation until it is appropriate to do so.
- Record the concern contemporaneously, capturing both factual details and professional judgement.
- Cross reference the matter against up-to-date records, so that patterns or similar behaviours are appropriately identified and considered.
As a matter of best practice, all relevant meetings and decisions should be documented in a manner that includes rationale for decisions taken, attendees, and timescales for follow-up. This task should not be considered as another bureaucratic hurdle – it’s important that this task is completed properly as it can form the evidentiary backbone of accountability and procedural fairness. The Review, unfortunately, found that these principles were not diligently followed.
When concerns cross organisational or geographic boundaries, a proper application of information-sharing protocols is critical as this will ensure that appropriate information is shared with the relevant organisations in a timely and effective manner. Failing to share such information means that individuals are often placed at needless risk.
Professionals exercise statutory functions in the public interest and must be aware of and apply the relevant criterion; a blinkered approach must be avoided at all costs. Focussing disproportionally on e.g. a criminal evidence threshold, can result in the exclusion of an equally relevant ‘suitability to work with children’ test; which in this instance placed school children at risk.
Continuous professional training and proactively referring to actual guidance documentation are essential components of a practitioner’s toolkit; reliance on outdated practices or informal recollections of what documents might or might not state no longer meets the standard of care expected of professionals. Informal recollections, despite their persuasiveness, can be subject to interpretation or in the worst case (as was the case in this instance) blatant abuse.
Practitioners should also receive appropriate training, supervision and if necessary, access to specialist advice. In complex or sensitive cases in particular, a centralised support framework to ensure the consistent application of best practice is recommended as this will help to manage bias or poor localised practice.
When making decisions, the impact on both the alleged perpetrator and victim must be properly considered and evaluated. Safeguarding against risk is not, should not and cannot, be confined to working hours or institutional boundaries; vigilance must extend to the constant and unpredictable nature of potential harm, be that a working day, late evenings, weekends or indeed school holidays.
The Clywch Report
In June 2004, the then Children’s Commissioner for Wales, Peter Clarke, published the Clywch Report [5], named after the Welsh word meaning “Listen.” Its enduring message was that, systems fail when individuals stop listening.
Two decades later, the Brought Justice Report echoes that same truth. Despite legislative reform and structural progress, the report illustrates that safeguarding failures often arise, not from a lack of policy or processes, but from a failure of professional curiosity and procedural diligence.
Whilst we can strive for and introduce robust legal frameworks and mechanisms for safeguarding; they are sadly, only as effective as their application.
Conclusion
The Brought Justice Report cannot be viewed as an isolated failure but, once again, as a call to strengthen institutional integrity and operational procedural compliance from a safeguarding perspective.
The question, 21 years after Clywch, remains: are we listening — and equally as importantly, are we diligently doing everything we can?
Webinar – 18 December 2025
Join 30 Park Place chambers and Legal News Wales for this free webinar on the Brought Justice Review and the ongoing duty to safeguard.
This free webinar, hosted on Microsoft Teams will explore the details and impact of the review, and feature barristers from 30 Park Place and guest speakers (listed below).
Who should attend?
Anyone the Child Practice Review impacts.
Speakers
- Jane Crowley KC, 30 Park Place
- Sian Jones, Safeguarding Manager, Welsh Sports Association
- Nathan Jones, 30 Park Place
- Lowri Patterson, 30 Park Place
- Huw Davies, 30 Park Place
- Laura Shepherd, 30 Park Place
Register
Click here to register your free place.
Further guidance
If you have concerns or would like support in reviewing your organisation’s safeguarding practice or compliance procedures in light of the issues raised in the Brought Justice Report, please contact the clerks at civil@30parkplace.co.uk
[1] https://www.northwalessafeguardingboard.wales/gwynedd-child-practice-review/
[2] https://www.safeguarding.wales/en/chi-i/chi-i-c5/ . The Wales Safeguarding Procedures are to be found here: https://www.safeguarding.wales/en/
[3] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/anaw/2014/4/contents
[4] https://www.gov.wales/working-together-safeguard-people-code-safeguarding-practice
[5] https://www.childcomwales.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Clywch.pdf
