Suleyman Folami

Introduction

Suleyman Folami taught at the Advanced Education Centre in London from September 2016 and served as one of its designated safeguarding leads. In March 2024 a Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) professional conduct panel found against him on a single allegation: a conviction for conducting an unregistered independent educational institution, contrary to section 96(2) of the Education and Skills Act 2008. The panel recommended that publication of its findings would be punishment enough and no prohibition order should follow — but decision maker Marc Cavey disagreed and banned him from teaching anyway, indefinitely, with a two-year review period.

Background Information

Folami’s school occupied the first floor of the same premises as Advanced Education Primary School, where he had worked since September 2016 as a teacher and designated safeguarding lead. Ofsted inspected the premises on 12 December 2018, 5 March 2019 and 6 March 2019 under section 97 of the Education and Skills Act 2008, and concluded that Folami was also involved in the conduct of the unregistered independent school operating above it. The Crown Prosecution Service prosecuted, and on 4 March 2020 Folami was convicted. He received a four-week custodial sentence suspended for 12 months and was ordered to complete 120 hours of unpaid work. The case was decided at a private panel meeting on 26 February 2024 without a hearing, at Folami’s own request, on a signed statement of agreed facts.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Convicted of running an unregistered school; panel wanted publication only, the ban came anyway. The conviction itself was admitted and conclusive. The contested question was the sanction — and the decision maker overrode the panel’s recommendation.

The panel accepted the conviction certificate as conclusive proof and found the allegation proved. It accepted that Folami had previously demonstrated “exceptionally high standards in both his personal and professional conduct”, that the incident was out of character, and that three character statements — including one from a former employer describing an “excellent teacher” with “empathy, rapport and professionalism” — attested to his contribution. It also found no evidence that his behaviour was motivated by financial gain, and noted that the sentencing judge had not stated there was deliberate dishonesty, with the judge’s focus instead on the hours the school operated and whether what was being run was not a supplementary school. On that basis the panel concluded that “the recommendation of no prohibition order would be both a proportionate and an appropriate response”, with publication of the findings sufficient.

Cavey took a different view. He placed “considerable weight on the seriousness of the misconduct found, which resulted in Mr Folami being convicted of a serious criminal offence resulting in a suspended sentence of imprisonment”, noted that the unregistered institution was unlikely to have been subject to the same Ofsted inspections as a registered school, and concluded that “a prohibition order is proportionate and in the public interest”. On the review period he weighed the suspended custodial sentence, the safeguarding risks, and what he described as limited evidence that Folami had attained full insight and remorse, concluding that a two-year review period was required to maintain public confidence in the profession.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The published decision is the case’s entire public record; no press coverage attaches to it. The consequences unfolded over four years: the Ofsted inspections of 2018 and 2019, the criminal conviction of March 2020, and the TRA referral that ended in the February 2024 panel meeting. Folami admitted the conviction at the outset and did not contest the facts; what he lost was the sanction argument, and the decision maker’s override of the panel’s no-ban recommendation is the case’s defining feature.

Current Status

Folami is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. The order takes effect from service. He may apply for the prohibition order to be set aside, but not until 8 March 2026, two years from the date of the order at the earliest — and the decision states this is not an automatic right to have the order removed. He retains a right of appeal to the King’s Bench Division of the High Court within 28 days of notice. The determination is dated 26 February 2024, with Cavey’s order dated 8 March 2024.

Impact on Their Career/Life

Folami’s case shows the limit of a sympathetic panel record. Every mitigation finding a teacher could want — out-of-character conduct, no financial motive, no finding of dishonesty, strong testimonials — was made, and the panel still read the public interest as satisfied by publication alone. The decision maker’s power to reject that recommendation is what converted a published conviction into a lifetime teaching ban. For the unregistered-school issue specifically, the case sits alongside the prosecution of colleagues at the same centre and demonstrates that a conviction under section 96(2) can end a teaching career even where the criminal court imposed only a suspended sentence.

Sources

• Dept for Education, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr Suleyman Folami” — source