A TEACHER who arranged to meet pupils after college will remain in the profession as his conduct was “not sexually motivated”.

It had been alleged that Julian Vilarrubi at Bellerbys College, Brighton, had asked a pupil to attend his studio outside of college hours to pose for life drawings.

Mr Vilarrubi admitted communicating with pupils via his personal mobile phone and arranging to meet with them after hours.

However, he said he did not ask the pupils to pose for life drawings, nor was his behaviour sexually motivated.

A Teaching Regulation Agency panel heard that life drawing was an important feature of the course undertaken by two pupils, named as Pupil A and Pupil B. The course involved drawing nude models.

READ MORE: Teacher banned over late night meeting with student

Pupil B gave evidence that, on one occasion, she was invited by Mr Vilarrubi to attend his external studio after a life drawing session.

Mr Vilarrubi denied this allegation. He that he had invited her to sit for a portrait, but was explicit that it was not a life drawing session.

Pupil B acknowledged that she assumed the suggestion was made for her to pose as a life model, and the allegation was found “not proved”.

However, Mr Vilarrubi accepted that he communicated with both Pupil A and Pupil B and accepted that he asked to meet and did meet pupils outside of college hours.

The panel accepted Pupil A’s allegation that he had asked her to go for drinks with him and Mr Vilarrubi also accepted that he had turned up at her house while she was applying for universities.

The panel was also shown pictures of Pupil A taken by Mr Vilarrubi in the classroom. He accepted these photographs were a breach of professional boundaries.

“In light of its findings, the panel was satisfied that Mr Vilarrubi's conduct amounted to misconduct of a serious nature which fell significantly short of the standards expected of the profession.

“The panel also took into account that, with reference to Pupil A, she had provided him with gifts and a card in which she referred to him in flattering terms. This ought to have put Mr Vilarrubi on notice that he needed to tread carefully in his dealings with her and ensure that his actions were transparent and above board.”

However, the panel decided not to bar him from the profession.

The panel said: “In all the circumstances, on balance, the panel concluded that the risk of repetition was limited. Mr Vilarrubi had a very public fall from grace. The panel took account of the impact of events upon Mr Vilarrubi, including these proceedings. Given the clear and painful lessons learnt, the panel considered it unlikely that Mr Vilarrubi would put himself in a similar position again.

“The panel also considered that, given his experience and prior good service, there was every prospect that Mr Vilarrubi could be an asset to the profession in the future, should he decide to return to teaching and subject to him continuing to reflect upon the nature and implications of his actions. The references presented by Mr Vilarrubi were positive and his abilities as an educator were not in doubt.”