Despicable but unsurprising.
It's carte blanche for anyone with a grudge (or whatever motive) to make a fabricated allegation against someone who works in an Enhanced DBS job, knowing that even if the allegation is dismissed, it will probably show up on their record for life.
Not surprising that the police decided it was relevant information, as they genuinely believe they are never wrong. Even if someone is acquitted, they still believe the person is guilty.
We have never had "innocent unless proven guilty" in this country, as - unlike many European countries - defendants are routinely named and photographed publicly following arrest/charging/during the trial, but when they have not yet been convicted/acquitted. This should only be allowed after conviction.
Here's the judgment: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2016-0144-judgment.pdf
The reasons given by the police for disclosure are absolutely disgusting and show they have no respect for the criminal justice system when a person is found not guilty:
In answer to a question as to the relevance of the information, she [the decision-maker] noted that the position of lecturer would give the opportunity for the applicant to befriend vulnerable females of a similar age to the victim, with the risk that he might use his role “to abuse his trust and authority and commit similar offences.”
It further states: "on the balance of probabilities the allegation was more likely to be true than false."
Then "If the applicant repeats this alleged behaviour in the [position applied for], vulnerable people could be caused serious emotional and physical harm."
Read as: I don't care about the jury's verdict. The decision of a court of law is irrelevant. He is guilty. Everyone ever charged with an offence is guilty.
I am seething at this. I would love for the officer(s) making this decision to be wrongly accused of a sex offence and to be acquitted yet unemployable for the rest of their lives. I wonder what their view of this would be then.