Re: Dr Jonathan Richard Ashton v GMC [2013] EWHC 943 Admin

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Re: Dr Jonathan Richard Ashton v GMC [2013] EWHC 943 Admin"

Transcription

1 Appeals Circular A11/ To: Fitness to Practise Panel Panellists Legal Assessors Copy: Interim Orders Panel Panellists Investigation Committee Panellists Panel Secretaries Medical Defence Organisations Employer Liaison Advisers Re: Dr Jonathan Richard Ashton v GMC [2013] EWHC 943 Admin Background Dr Jonathan Ashton appeared before the Fitness to Practise Panel ( Panel ) in July and November The Panel found that Dr Ashton s fitness to practise was impaired by reason of misconduct and determined that his name should be suspended from the Medical Register for a period of six months. Further, the Panel imposed an order of immediate suspension. Dr Ashton appealed in relation to the finding of impaired fitness to practise and the sanction imposed. The doctor on the morning of the hearing also issued an application asking the court to deal with the order of immediate suspension. Appeal The appeal was considered by His Honour Mr Justice Stuart-Smith on 18 March His judgment was given on 19 April HHJ Stuart-Smith set out the principles applicable to an appeal under section 40 in relation to the substantive sanctioned imposed and an application under section 38 in relation to an appeal against an immediate order (paragraphs 3-8).

2 The Judge then sets out in some detail the factual background in relation to the matters considered by the Panel and their findings in relation to facts, impairment and sanction (paragraphs 9-27). He thereafter sets out the grounds of appeal (paragraph 28) that the Panel erred in law and was wrong: 1. In determining that the single incident of writing a routine letter of referral when an urgent letter of referral was required was sufficient: (a) to amount to misconduct; or (b) to justify a finding of impairment of fitness to practise in respect of a doctor with a 33 year medical career and no other allegations of misconduct. 2. In determining that it was necessary or proportionate to suspend the doctor s registration for six months when conditions would have been workable and appropriate. 3. In determining that it was necessary or proportionate to impose an immediate order in all the circumstances. Ground 1(a): The finding of misconduct HHJ Stuart-Smith sets out Counsel for the doctor s points in challenging the finding of misconduct (paragraph 29) as follows: i) That the contents of the letter of referral, which Dr Archard [the GMC s expert witness] accepted, were very good. ii) That Patient A s case did not satisfy all the criteria laid down by NICE for cases requiring urgent referral. iii) That the referral was not treated as urgent by the specialist who received it, despite the satisfactory contents of the letter. iv) That the evidence available to the Panel at Stage 2 that Dr Ashton was no longer working in general practice and that evidence had been submitted that he was a competent and valued colleague in the work that he was now carrying out. The Judge sets out the submissions made by Counsel for the doctor in support. He thereafter sets out his discussion of the arguments put forward (paragraphs 33-57). 2

3 He confirms that what the Panel found to constitute misconduct was not the quality of the contents of the letter of referral but the fact the referral was marked routine and not urgent (paragraph 33). He goes on to say there was no substance in the submission based upon the terms of the NICE guidelines (paragraph 34). He then goes on to confirm that the fact the referral was not upgraded to urgent by hospital specialist was expressly addressed by the Panel, which pointed out that the hospital specialist did not have the benefit of clinically assessing the patient in person and did not know the patient s history: the specialist was merely making a judgment on the basis of Dr Ashton s referral letter and the list of current medication alone (paragraph 35). HHJ Stuart-Smith confirms that the GP s obligation to refer appropriately is free standing and independent of the obligations of the specialist (paragraph 35). He confirms that the Panel did not misunderstand Counsel for the doctor s reference to absolution in that a referral could be re-prioritised by specialists as absolving a referring physician from making the appropriate referral. Further, he confirms that the reference to absolution must been seen in context and the Panels reasons should not be construed with the same rigour as might be applicable when interpreting a statute or a detailed commercial contract. Adopting a fair, and contextual, reading shows that the Panel understood Counsel for the doctor s submission and rejected it. In HHJ Stuart-Smith s judgment they were right to do so. He confirms (paragraph 38): What was under scrutiny was Dr Ashton s conduct, not that of the hospital specialist. The Panel s reasons make clear that it understood (correctly) that the circumstances in which a hospital specialist makes his judgment differ from those applying to a general practitioner making a referral. That being so the Panel was correct to concentrate on the nature of Dr Ashton s conduct alone, and not to be deflected by reference to other non-comparable conduct or other cases decided on different facts. The final point raised by Counsel for the doctor he considered adds little substance to the question of misconduct save that it endorsed what the Panel already knew, namely that this was an isolated incident in a long career (paragraph 39). The Judge notes that the Panel had regard to the submissions made by Counsel for the doctor on the issue of misconduct and it reached its conclusion having expressly applied the correct test and had taken into account the case law to which it had been referred and expressly mentioned Nandi v GMC [2004] EWHC 2317 (Admin) as being particularly useful (paragraph 40). 3

4 The Judge then goes on to consider each of the cases upon which Counsel for the doctor relied as follows: Rao v GMC [2002] UKPC 65 (paragraphs 41-44); Silver v GMC [2003] UKPC 33 (paragraphs 45-49); and Nandi v GMC [2004] EWHC 2317 (Admin) (paragraphs 50-57). In summary, in relation to Rao, the Judge confirms that the success of the appeal stemmed directly from Legal Assessor s direction which was materially defective and therefore the Privy Council had not reached a decision that Dr Rao s conduct was not serious professional misconduct (paragraph 44). In relation to Silver, the Judge notes, that although the Privy Council allowed the appeal, it did not do so on the basis of the doctor s submissions. The Privy Council identified that the Professional Conduct Committee ( PCC ) had made its finding of serious professional misconduct before taking into account matters that were relevant to that finding (paragraph 47). The Judge then goes on to consider the case of Nandi where the finding of serious professional misconduct was challenged on two grounds - firstly that no reasonable tribunal could have made the findings of fact; and, secondly, that taken at their highest, the findings did not disclose serious professional misconduct (paragraph 51). The Judge in that case rejected the first head of challenge but upheld the challenge to the finding of serious professional misconduct as there was ambiguity in the PCC s determination. In the relation to the decision in Nandi HHJ Stuart-Smith notes the following points (paragraph 54) that the Judge, in that case: i) identified two clear errors in the approach of the PCC. ii) engaged in a detailed review of the underlying facts. iii) accepted that the PCC could regard conduct which fell below the standard to be expected and below that required by good medical practice as capable of amounting to misconduct, but he emphasised the need to have regard to what the doctor actually did. iv) his decision related specifically to the facts of the case he was considering. HHJ Stuart-Smith concludes (paragraph 55) that he was unable to agree with Counsel for the doctor s submission that the three cases lead to the conclusion that Dr Ashton was not guilty of misconduct: i) Neither Rao nor Silver held that the PCC in those cases would have been wrong if it had addressed the issue correctly and concluded that the conduct in question had amounted to serious professional misconduct. 4

5 ii) On a detailed review of the facts of Nandi all that had been shown was a simple failure to comply with guidance and Good Medical Practice. That does not show or even suggest that Dr Ashton s conduct should be characterised in the same way. iii) Having reviewed the evidence and the materials available he was not satisfied that the Panel omitted, misinterpreted or took an erroneous view of the facts of this case. iv) Rao, Silver, and Nandi were decisions on their own facts and he was not persuaded by comparison of the facts of the three decisions with the facts of Dr Ashton s case that an argument could properly be made by analogy that his conduct did not amount to misconduct. He goes on (paragraph 55): What is obvious is that the Panel was referred to the three cases and took them into account; and that the panel was better placed than the Court to judge the gravity of Dr Ashton s conduct because of its expertise and the fact that it had heard the evidence that underpinned its findings. The Panel applied the correct legal test, namely whether Dr Ashton s failure was deplorable or an elementary and grievous failure ; and there was uncontradicted evidence from Dr Archard upon which it was fully entitled to conclude, applying its expertise, that his failure merited those descriptions. In the circumstances the Judge was not persuaded the finding of misconduct was wrong. Although it is not necessary for him to say so, he considered it was clearly right. In the circumstances Ground 1(a) Dr Ashton s challenge failed (paragraph 57). Ground 1(b): Impairment of Fitness to Practise The Judge summarises Counsel for the doctor s submissions and those of Counsel for the GMC (paragraphs 58-59). He thereafter sets out his discussion in relation to the issues (paragraphs 60-66) in respect of the first argument put forward on the use of the word deficiencies at points in the determination of impairment. The Judge considers that the argument was of no substance or merit and was rejected (paragraph 60). HHJ Stuart-Smith notes that the real problem for the Panel (and for the court) was the absence of any evidence or indication that Dr Ashton had any insight into the seriousness of what he had done. He chose not to give, or call, evidence at stage 1 of the enquiry. After the findings of fact were made in July 2012, there was a period of four months before the November hearings when it would have been open to Dr Ashton to submit evidence going to his appreciation of his misconduct and the issue of impairment, but he chose not to do so (paragraph 62). 5

6 The Judge confirms that even if, in principle, Dr Ashton s fitness to practise might have been easily remediable there was no evidence that it was remediable, in fact, in Dr Ashton s case or that he had made any efforts towards remediation of his proved deficiencies. In the circumstances the Judge considers the Panel was entitled to take this into account as a matter of significant concern and weight in relation to the issue of impairment (paragraph 63). He goes on to confirm that Dr Ashton s failure to acknowledge that his conduct was inadequate went beyond merely not admitting the charge when it was laid against him, since it was persisted in for the months following the determination of facts right up to the Panel s determination and continued to the date of the appeal hearing. He goes on to say (paragraph 64): It would have been open to Dr Ashton to acknowledge that his conduct had been inadequate in respect of the matters alleged at any stage. He could have done so formally through his counsel, or by the submission of a letter or evidence of his own. He could have done so in terms which accepted that his inadequacy justified findings of misconduct and, if he wished, impairment; or he could have done so in terms which, while accepting that he had fallen below proper standards, kept open either or both of those issues. In the event he did nothing. He concludes in relations to this head of challenge (paragraph 65): The criticism of the Panel s reference to Dr Ashton breaching a fundamental tenet is equally semantic and unfounded. It is submitted that the fundamental requirement was for the doctor to make a referral to the correct specialist and to provide the specialist with the necessary information for them to follow up on the referral appropriately. That submission fails to recognise the thrust of what the Panel was saying: in order to discharge the fundamental tenet of the profession which required Dr Ashton to protect the health of Patient A and to provide a good standard of practice and care, Dr Ashton should have referred Patient A urgently. His failure to do so was therefore a breach of the fundamental tenet. That was a breach which the Panel was entitled to conclude was liable to undermine public confidence in the profession if the full facts were known. In the circumstances the Judge determined that Ground 1(b) of Dr Ashton s challenge failed (paragraph 66). Ground 2: Sanction of 6 Months Suspension The Judge sets out briefly the submission of Counsel for the doctor and GMC (paragraphs 67-68) and thereafter sets out his discussion of the issues (paragraphs 69-75). 6

7 He notes that the Panel concluded that for reasons given in their determination the imposition of a sanction was necessary and in doing so referred to the need to protect the public, declare and uphold proper standards of conduct and behaviour and maintain public confidence in the medical profession. As the authorities cited above show, these were appropriate criteria for the Panel to apply and no error of law was shown (paragraph 70). The Judge then goes on to consider paragraphs from the GMC s Indicative Sanctions Guidance (paragraph 71). He notes that although the guidance indicates that conditions might be most appropriate in cases following a single incident, it does not follow they will be. For the reasons already given, the Panel was not satisfied that Dr Ashton has displayed insight and was justified in taking that view (paragraph 72). He concludes (paragraph 74): Viewed overall, the decision to impose the sanction of suspension was reasoned and has not been shown to be unreasonable so as to justify the Court in substituting a different sanction or no order at all. Comparing the terms of the Panel s determination with the paragraphs of the Guidance to which I have referred shows that the Panel kept that guidance in mind and applied it. In particular, [57] provides no support for Dr Ashton s submission that the order for suspension was unnecessary and disproportionate; nor does Raschid, which highlights that punishment is neither the only nor necessarily the primary driver for the Panel considering sanction. In the circumstances Ground 2 of Dr Ashton s challenge failed (paragraph 75). Ground 3: Immediate order of suspension Whilst Counsel for the doctor acknowledged that the Panel may impose an immediate order she considered that none of the criteria for the imposition of such an order were present. This was disputed by Counsel for the GMC (paragraph 76). The Judge sets out his discussion of the issues (paragraphs 77-83). HHJ Stuart-Smith acknowledges that the Panel stated the correct test and that the core of its reasoning appeared to have been that irrespective of his field of practice, a medical practitioner must be able to assess the clinical needs of his patient and make urgent referral decisions when required to do so. Then noted again Dr Ashton s failure to acknowledge his error and concluded that It therefore cannot be satisfied that his misconduct would not be repeated (paragraph 79). The Judge confirms that even making due allowance for the Panel s expertise he was unable to accept the reasons given by the Panel justified the imposition of an immediate order. Given the finding of misconduct and impairment Dr Ashton was highly unlikely to 7

8 return to general practice in the interim and it was therefore not possible to identify any rational basis to finding any material risk existed against which it was necessary to protect the public (paragraph 80). The Judge acknowledges the public interest is broader than the need to protect members of the public. The Panel appeared to have regarded the public interest justification to have lain in the maintenance of public confidence in the medical profession and declaring and upholding proper standards of conduct and behaviour. He confirms (paragraph 81): Whilst these are very important purposes that are closely related to the Panel s power to impose sanctions, it is again hard to see why public confidence would be eroded by permitting Dr Ashton to practise in a remote field of medicine during the relatively short appeal period; and the upholding of proper standards of conduct and behaviour may reasonably be said to have been achieved by the Panel s decision to impose the 6 months suspension, without the need for an immediate suspension as well. He concludes (paragraph 82): In my judgment, this Ground of Appeal is finely balanced. On the one hand, the Court should pay due attention to the views of the primary decision maker and should not simply engage in a resentencing exercise. On the other, having examined the reasons given by the Panel, they appear to be very thin and not materially supported by reference either to the terms of s. 38 of the Act or to the terms of [ ] of the Indicative Sanctions Guidance. Although the matter is finely balanced, when the balance is struck I consider it falls decisively in favour of Dr Ashton and that the Panel s order to impose the immediate suspension was unjustifiable and wrong. In the circumstances Ground 3 of Dr Ashton s challenge succeeds. Salient Points Absent evidence or indication that a doctor has insight into the seriousness of what he/she has done, even if matters are easily remediable and there is no evidence they have been remedied a finding of impairment is inevitable. The imposition of an immediate order after a finding of impairment should be carefully considered and not imposed as an inevitable consequence of the finding. Panel Development Team pandevteam@gmc-uk.org 8

Dr Dutta s appeal was considered by Mr Justice Haddon Cave on 12 December 2012 with judgment being given on 1 February 2013.

Dr Dutta s appeal was considered by Mr Justice Haddon Cave on 12 December 2012 with judgment being given on 1 February 2013. Appeals Circular A 03/13 25 February 2013 To: Fitness to Practise Panel Panellists Legal Assessors Copy: Interim Orders Panel Panellists Investigation Committee Panellists Panel Secretaries Medical Defence

More information

Re: Dr Fernando Hidalgo Martin v GMC [2014] EWHC 1269 Admin

Re: Dr Fernando Hidalgo Martin v GMC [2014] EWHC 1269 Admin Appeals Circular A25/14 16 October 2014 To: Interim Order Panellists Fitness to Practise Panellists Legal Assessors Copy: Investigation Committee Panellists Panel Secretaries Medical Defence Organisations

More information

Nursing and Midwifery Council: Fitness to Practise Committee

Nursing and Midwifery Council: Fitness to Practise Committee Nursing and Midwifery Council Fitness to Practise Committee Substantive Hearing Friday, 5 January 2018 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 61 Aldwych, London WC2B 4AE Name of registrant: NMC PIN: Mr Razvan

More information

[2015] EWHC 854 (QB) 2015 WL

[2015] EWHC 854 (QB) 2015 WL Dr Saima Alam v The General Medical Council Case No: CO/4949/2014 High Court of Justice Queen's Bench Division Administrative Court 27 March 2015 [2015] EWHC 854 (QB) 2015 WL 1310679 Before: Mr Justice

More information

INDICATIVE SANCTIONS GUIDANCE DRAFT

INDICATIVE SANCTIONS GUIDANCE DRAFT INDICATIVE SANCTIONS GUIDANCE DRAFT Contents Purpose of document... 2 What is this document about?... 2 Who is this document for?... 3 1. Part 1: Fitness to Practise stages... 3 Investigation... 3 Scrutiny

More information

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC UPTON, Natalie Jane Registration No: 110087 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE JULY 2018 Outcome: Suspension for 12 months with immediate suspension (with a review) Natalie UPTON, a

More information

Good decision making: Fitness to practise hearings and sanctions guidance

Good decision making: Fitness to practise hearings and sanctions guidance Good decision making: Fitness to practise hearings and sanctions guidance Revised March 2017 The text of this document (but not the logo and branding) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or

More information

GUIDANCE FOR CASE EXAMINERS The purpose of this guidance 1. The General Optical Council (GOC) recognises that it is important that patients, registrants, professional and representative organisations,

More information

In accordance with Rule 41 of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules 2004 the hearing was held in public.

In accordance with Rule 41 of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules 2004 the hearing was held in public. PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 27/11/2018-29/11/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Stamatios OIKONOMOU GMC reference number: 6072884 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Misconduct Ptychio Iatrikes

More information

Good decision making: Investigating committee meetings and outcomes guidance

Good decision making: Investigating committee meetings and outcomes guidance Good decision making: Investigating committee meetings and outcomes guidance Revised March 2017 The text of this document (but not the logo and branding) may be reproduced free of charge in any format

More information

Non-compliance hearings guidance for medical practitioners tribunals

Non-compliance hearings guidance for medical practitioners tribunals Non-compliance hearings guidance for medical practitioners tribunals Introduction 1 The aim of this guidance is to promote consistency and transparency in decision making relating to non-compliance hearings.

More information

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC LIMBU, Dino Registration No: 246153 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE AUGUST 2015 Outcome: Fitness to practise impaired; erasure with an immediate suspension order Dinu LIMBU, a dental

More information

Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Meeting

Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Meeting Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Meeting NMC, 20 Old Bailey, London, EC4M 7LN 18 June 2014 Name of Registrant: Mr Matthew Robin Pitts NMC PIN: 93A0777E Part(s) of the register: Registered Nurse

More information

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC MARQUEZ LOPEZ, Daniel Registration No: 260732 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE JULY 2018 OUTCOME: Fitness to Practise Impaired. Reprimand Issued Daniel MARQUEZ LOPEZ, a dentist, Grado

More information

HEARING PARTLY HEARD IN PRIVATE

HEARING PARTLY HEARD IN PRIVATE HEARING PARTLY HEARD IN PRIVATE The Committee has made a determination in this case that includes some private information. That information has been omitted from the text. ROBERTSON, Harry Gordon Registration

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations. Medical Practitioner: Dates: 26/07/ /07/2018. GMC reference number: Tyne

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations. Medical Practitioner: Dates: 26/07/ /07/2018. GMC reference number: Tyne PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 26/07/2018-27/07/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Neil Ineson GMC reference number: 2431350 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Conviction / Caution MB BS 1978 University

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Dates: 16/10/ /10/2017

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Dates: 16/10/ /10/2017 PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 16/10/2017 18/10/2017 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Johannes Christiaan Hermanus BASSON GMC reference number: 4056885 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Misconduct

More information

Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Hearing

Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Hearing Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Hearing 22 July 2016 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 61 Aldwych, London WC2B 4AE Name of Registrant Nurse: NMC PIN: Nomathemba Amanda Primrose Socikwa 10G0506E

More information

Conduct & Competence Committee. Substantive Meeting. 20 October Nursing and Midwifery Council, 2 Stratford Place, London E20 1EJ

Conduct & Competence Committee. Substantive Meeting. 20 October Nursing and Midwifery Council, 2 Stratford Place, London E20 1EJ Conduct & Competence Committee Substantive Meeting 20 October 2016 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 2 Stratford Place, London E20 1EJ Registrant: NMC PIN: Sean Michael Ridout 10H3375E Part(s) of the register:

More information

Nursing and Midwifery Council:

Nursing and Midwifery Council: Nursing and Midwifery Council Fitness to Practise Committee Substantive Hearing 23 February 2018 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 2 Stratford Place, Montfichet Road, London, E20 1EJ Name of registrant: NMC

More information

DETERMINATION ON THE FACTS AND IMPAIRMENT - 25/10/2017

DETERMINATION ON THE FACTS AND IMPAIRMENT - 25/10/2017 PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 25 to 26 October 2017 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Swathi Deepak PAI GMC reference number: 5202874 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Misconduct MB BS 1998 Manipal

More information

Health and Care Professions Tribunal Service PRACTICE NOTE. Finding that Fitness to Practise is Impaired

Health and Care Professions Tribunal Service PRACTICE NOTE. Finding that Fitness to Practise is Impaired Health and Care Professions Tribunal Service PRACTICE NOTE Finding that Fitness to Practise is Impaired This Practice Note has been issued by the Council for the Guidance of Panels and to assist those

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 01/11/2017 03/11/2017 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Mohamed AMRANI GMC reference number: 3419692 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Conviction / Caution MD 1987 Universite

More information

Nursing and Midwifery Council:

Nursing and Midwifery Council: Nursing and Midwifery Council Fitness to Practise Committee Substantive Hearing 16 July 2018 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 61 Aldwych, London WC2B 4AE Name of registrant: NMC PIN: Part(s) of the register:

More information

Universiteto. That being registered under the Medical Act 1983, as amended:

Universiteto. That being registered under the Medical Act 1983, as amended: PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 29/01/2018 30/01/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Ali ISMAIL GMC reference number: 6168323 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Misconduct Gydytojas 2006 Kauno Medicinos

More information

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC AYOR-AYO, Auma Hilda Registration No: 198660 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE AUGUST 2017 Outcome: Suspended for 12 months with immediate suspension (with a review) Auma Hilda AYOR-AYO,

More information

Allegation and Findings of Fact That being registered under the Medical Act 1983 (as amended):

Allegation and Findings of Fact That being registered under the Medical Act 1983 (as amended): PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 06/11/2017 07/11/2017 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Erik MILNER GMC reference number: 3317501 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Conviction / Caution MB ChB 1989 University

More information

2004 No 2608 HEALTH CARE AND ASSOCIATED PROFESSIONS DOCTORS. General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules Order of Council 2004

2004 No 2608 HEALTH CARE AND ASSOCIATED PROFESSIONS DOCTORS. General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules Order of Council 2004 This is a version of The General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules which incorporates the 2004 Rules and amendments made to those rules in 2009, 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2017 2004 No 2608 HEALTH

More information

Minutes of Investigation Committee (Oral) hearing

Minutes of Investigation Committee (Oral) hearing Minutes of Investigation Committee (Oral) hearing Date of hearing: 19 May 2017 Name of doctor: Dr Richard Allan Reference Number: 6055488 Registered qualifications: BM BCh 2002 Oxford University Committee

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations. Medical Practitioner: Dates: 15/08/ /08/2018. GMC reference number:

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations. Medical Practitioner: Dates: 15/08/ /08/2018. GMC reference number: PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 15/08/2018-17/08/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Zholia Alemi GMC reference number: 4246372 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Misconduct MB ChB 1992 University

More information

HEARING PARTLY HEARD IN PRIVATE*

HEARING PARTLY HEARD IN PRIVATE* HEARING PARTLY HEARD IN PRIVATE* *The Committee has made a determination in this case that includes some private information. That information has been omitted from this text. GRAHAM, Lisa Marie Registration

More information

This case was reviewed on the papers, with the agreement of both parties, by a Legally Qualified Chair.

This case was reviewed on the papers, with the agreement of both parties, by a Legally Qualified Chair. PUBLIC RECORD Date: 19 December 2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Hadiza BAWA-GARBA GMC reference number: 6080659 Primary medical qualification: Type of case Conviction/ Caution MB ChB 2003 University

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations. Medical Practitioner: Date: 22/10/2018. GMC reference number: Medyczny. Review - Misconduct

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations. Medical Practitioner: Date: 22/10/2018. GMC reference number: Medyczny. Review - Misconduct PUBLIC RECORD Date: 22/10/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Shazia Akram GMC reference number: 7094045 Primary medical qualification: Type of case XXX Review - Misconduct Lekarz 2010 Warszawski Uniwersytet

More information

Guidance on Undertakings

Guidance on Undertakings Guidance on Undertakings Introduction and overview 1 The purpose of this guidance is to demonstrate the way in which Rule 10 of the Fitness to Practise Rules 2004 (revised) is to be put into effect by

More information

Nursing and Midwifery Council:

Nursing and Midwifery Council: Nursing and Midwifery Council Fitness to Practise Committee Substantive Hearing 6 March 2018 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 114-116 George Street, Edinburgh, EH2 4LH Name of registrant: Deborah Iris Gallagher

More information

Guidance for the Practice Committees including Indicative Sanctions Guidance

Guidance for the Practice Committees including Indicative Sanctions Guidance Guidance for the Practice Committees including Indicative Sanctions Guidance Effective 1 st October 2016 1 2 Contents 1 Introduction and background... 4 2 The Professional Conduct Committee (PCC)... 5

More information

NRPSI INDICATIVE SANCTIONS GUIDANCE

NRPSI INDICATIVE SANCTIONS GUIDANCE NRPSI INDICATIVE SANCTIONS GUIDANCE Introduction Purpose of sanctions Warnings What sanctions are available Questions for the Panel to consider Mitigation and aggravating factors Guidance on considering

More information

Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Hearing Date: Thursday 4 July 2013 to Friday 5 July 2013

Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Hearing Date: Thursday 4 July 2013 to Friday 5 July 2013 Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Hearing Date: Thursday 4 July 2013 to Friday 5 July 2013 Nursing and Midwifery Council, The Hilton Belfast, 4 Lanyon Place, Belfast BT1 3LP Name of Registrant

More information

Undertakings at Medical Practitioners Tribunal hearings

Undertakings at Medical Practitioners Tribunal hearings Undertakings at Medical Practitioners Tribunal hearings 1 Under Rules 17(4) and 22(3) of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise (FTP) Rules Order of Council 2004, the Medical Practitioners Tribunal

More information

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC BAPU, Raisha Registration No: PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE MAY 2015 Outcome: Erasure and immediate suspension

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC BAPU, Raisha Registration No: PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE MAY 2015 Outcome: Erasure and immediate suspension HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC BAPU, Raisha Registration No: 110944 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE MAY 2015 Outcome: Erasure and immediate suspension Raisha BAPU, a dental nurse, NVQ L3 Oral Health Care:Dental

More information

4. This guidance is a public document and is available from the GOC s website at:

4. This guidance is a public document and is available from the GOC s website at: GUIDANCE FOR CASE EXAMINERS The purpose of this guidance 1. The General Optical Council (GOC) recognises that it is important that patients, registrants, professional and representative organisations,

More information

Nursing and Midwifery Council: Fitness to Practise Committee. Substantive Hearing 17 December 2018

Nursing and Midwifery Council: Fitness to Practise Committee. Substantive Hearing 17 December 2018 Nursing and Midwifery Council Fitness to Practise Committee Substantive Hearing 17 December 2018 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 2 Stratford Place, Montfichet Road, London, E20 1EJ Name of registrant: NMC

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations. Medical Practitioner: Date: 03/12/2018. GMC reference number: Review - Misconduct

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations. Medical Practitioner: Date: 03/12/2018. GMC reference number: Review - Misconduct PUBLIC RECORD Date: 03/12/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Bassel Hayssam EL-OSTA GMC reference number: 6046674 Primary medical qualification: Type of case Review - Misconduct Vrac 2000 Kazan State

More information

Indicative Sanctions Guidance Note

Indicative Sanctions Guidance Note Indicative Sanctions Guidance Note Introduction The CAA Global Limited Board ( the Board ) has prepared this guidance note for use by Adjudication Panels, Interim Order Panel, Disciplinary Tribunal Panels

More information

That being registered under the Medical Act 1983 (as amended):

That being registered under the Medical Act 1983 (as amended): PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 09/11/2017 10/11/2017 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Andrew MACKENZIE GMC reference number: 6134691 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Conviction / Caution MB ChB 2006

More information

HEALTH CARE AND ASSOCIATED PROFESSIONS DOCTORS. General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules Order of Council 2004

HEALTH CARE AND ASSOCIATED PROFESSIONS DOCTORS. General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules Order of Council 2004 2004 No 2608 HEALTH CARE AND ASSOCIATED PROFESSIONS DOCTORS General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules Order of Council 2004 Made 4th October 2004 Laid before Parliament 7th October 2004 Coming

More information

Introduction. Guidance on Warnings July 2017 Page 1 of 6

Introduction. Guidance on Warnings July 2017 Page 1 of 6 Guidance regarding warnings issued by Case Examiners and the Investigation Committee under the provisions of the General Optical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules 2013 Introduction 1. The General Optical

More information

Part(s) of the register: Registered Nurse Sub Part 1. Eileen Skinner (Chair Lay member) Colin Kennedy (Lay member) Catherine Gale (Registrant member)

Part(s) of the register: Registered Nurse Sub Part 1. Eileen Skinner (Chair Lay member) Colin Kennedy (Lay member) Catherine Gale (Registrant member) Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Meeting (CPD) Date: Thursday 13 August 2015 Nursing and Midwifery Council 2 Stratford Place, Montfichet Road, London, E20 1EJ Name of Registrant Nurse: NMC

More information

Appeals by the GMC pursuant to s.40a of the Medical Act 1983 ( s.40a appeals ) Guidance for Decision-makers

Appeals by the GMC pursuant to s.40a of the Medical Act 1983 ( s.40a appeals ) Guidance for Decision-makers Appeals by the GMC pursuant to s.40a of the Medical Act 1983 ( s.40a appeals ) Guidance for Decision-makers Introduction 1 Section 40A of the Medical Act 1983 (as amended by Article 17 of The General Medical

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 20/02/2017 22/02/2017 & 12/06/2017 13/06/2017 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Hadiza BAWA-GARBA GMC reference number: 6080659 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Conviction

More information

Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Meeting Monday 17 October 2016 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 61 Aldwych, London WC2B 4AE

Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Meeting Monday 17 October 2016 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 61 Aldwych, London WC2B 4AE Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Meeting Monday 17 October 2016 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 61 Aldwych, London WC2B 4AE Name of Registrant Nurse: NMC PIN: Miss Vicky Cross 10I0617E Part(s)

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Dates: 14/02/2018. Medical practitioner s name: Dr Martin Uylyam MEMBE

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Dates: 14/02/2018. Medical practitioner s name: Dr Martin Uylyam MEMBE PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 14/02/2018 Medical practitioner s name: Dr Martin Uylyam MEMBE GMC reference number: 7114460 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Non-compliance with a performance assessment

More information

Nursing and Midwifery Council:

Nursing and Midwifery Council: Nursing and Midwifery Council Fitness to Practise Committee Substantive Hearing 26 January 2018 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 61 Aldwych, London WC2B 4AE Name of Registrant Nurse: Mr Richard Imperio NMC

More information

Guidance for tribunal members on deciding the facts of a case where the doctor whose fitness to practise is in doubt has raised concerns locally

Guidance for tribunal members on deciding the facts of a case where the doctor whose fitness to practise is in doubt has raised concerns locally Agenda item: 17 Report title: Report by: Action: Guidance for tribunal members on deciding the facts of a case where the doctor whose fitness to practise is in doubt Anna Rowland, Assistant Director, Policy,

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations. Medical Practitioner: Dates: 13/06/ /06/2018. GMC reference number: New - Conviction / Caution

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations. Medical Practitioner: Dates: 13/06/ /06/2018. GMC reference number: New - Conviction / Caution PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 13/06/2018-15/06/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Chizoro Edohasim GMC reference number: 6039653 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Conviction / Caution MB BCh 1997

More information

A guide to GMC investigations and fitness to practise proceedings

A guide to GMC investigations and fitness to practise proceedings A guide to GMC investigations and fitness to practise proceedings Contents Introduction 2 What is the GMC s role? 3 Stage 1 Initial complaint 5 Stage 2 Formal investigation 6 Stage 3 Conclusion of investigation

More information

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC BANNATYNE, Ashleigh Registration No: 214342 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE JUNE 2017 - JUNE 2018* Most recent outcome: Suspension extended for 12 months (with a review) *See page

More information

Impaired Impaired. instructed

Impaired Impaired. instructed PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 15/05/2018 21/05/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Martin GEORGE GMC reference number: 6094870 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Conviction / Caution New - Misconduct

More information

Re: General Medical Council v Adeogba; General Medical Council v Visvardis [2016] EWCA Civ 162

Re: General Medical Council v Adeogba; General Medical Council v Visvardis [2016] EWCA Civ 162 Appeals Circular A04/16 1 April 2016 To: Medical Practitioner Tribunal members Legal Assessors Copy: Interim Orders Tribunal members Tribunal Clerks Medical Defence Organisations Employer Liaison Advisers

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 08/11/2017 10/11/2017 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Imran QURESHI GMC reference number: 7063588 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New Conviction/Caution MB BS 1997 University

More information

Nursing and Midwifery Council:

Nursing and Midwifery Council: Nursing and Midwifery Council Fitness to Practise Committee Substantive Hearing 20 October 2017 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 2 Stratford Place, Montfichet Road, London, E20 1EJ Name of Registrant: NMC

More information

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC HOUGHTON, Nicola Louise Registration No: 130502 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 2015 Outcome: Erasure (with immediate order) Nicola Louise HOUGHTON, Verified competency

More information

Nursing and Midwifery Council: Fitness to Practise Committee Substantive Hearing

Nursing and Midwifery Council: Fitness to Practise Committee Substantive Hearing Nursing and Midwifery Council Fitness to Practise Committee Substantive Hearing 1 December 2017 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 61 Aldwych, London WC2B 4AE Name of registrant: NMC PIN: Part(s) of the register:

More information

Guidance on the Registrar s Rule 9 power of review (July 2017)

Guidance on the Registrar s Rule 9 power of review (July 2017) Guidance on the Registrar s Rule 9 power of review (July 2017) 1 Introduction 1. Since 1 November 2016, the GDC s Registrar has had the power to review decisions to close cases without referring them to

More information

Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Meeting 23 December 2015 at 2 Stratford Place, Montfichet Road, London, E20 1EJ

Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Meeting 23 December 2015 at 2 Stratford Place, Montfichet Road, London, E20 1EJ Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Meeting 23 December 2015 at 2 Stratford Place, Montfichet Road, London, E20 1EJ Name of Registrant Nurse: NMC PIN: Richard James Rees 01I2055E Part(s) of the

More information

THERE IS AN ORDER MADE PURSUANT TO S 240 LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS ACT 2006 FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF MEDICAL DETAILS.

THERE IS AN ORDER MADE PURSUANT TO S 240 LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS ACT 2006 FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF MEDICAL DETAILS. THERE IS AN ORDER MADE PURSUANT TO S 240 LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS ACT 2006 FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF MEDICAL DETAILS. PLEASE SEE ORDER 5 ON PAGE 10 FOR FULL SUPPRESSION DETAILS. NEW ZEALAND LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Dates: 13/11/ /11/2017 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Katy MCALLISTER

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Dates: 13/11/ /11/2017 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Katy MCALLISTER PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 13/11/2017 15/11/2017 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Katy MCALLISTER GMC reference number: 7042366 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Conviction / Caution MB ChB 2009

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Date: 29/06/2017. Medical practitioner s name: Dr Dariusz Stanislaw FAFERA

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Date: 29/06/2017. Medical practitioner s name: Dr Dariusz Stanislaw FAFERA PUBLIC RECORD Date: 29/06/2017 Medical practitioner s name: Dr Dariusz Stanislaw FAFERA GMC reference number: 7396655 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Non-compliance with an English language

More information

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC LARKIN, Matthew Peter Registration No: 74917 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE DECEMBER 2017 Outcome: Erased with Immediate Suspension Matthew Peter LARKIN, a dentist, BDS Lpool 1998

More information

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC MAYCOCK, Andrew Edward Registration No: 170502 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE MAY 2018 Outcome: Erased with Immediate order of Suspension Andrew Edward MAYCOCK, a dental nurse,

More information

Guide to sanctioning

Guide to sanctioning Guide to sanctioning Contents 1. Background. 2 2. Application for registration or continued registration 3 3. Purpose of sanctions. 3 4. Principles in determining sanction.. 4 A. Proportionality... 4 B.

More information

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC

HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC JAMALI, Nisreen Registration No: 86173 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE September 2014 Outcome: Erased with immediate suspension. Nisreen JAMALI, BDS Karachi 2002, Statutory Exam

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Dates: 20/04/ /04/2017 (Adjourned Part Heard) 02/10/2017 (Reconvened)

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Dates: 20/04/ /04/2017 (Adjourned Part Heard) 02/10/2017 (Reconvened) PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 20/04/2017 27/04/2017 (Adjourned Part Heard) 02/10/2017 (Reconvened) Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Ahmed Mohsen TOLBA GMC reference number: 6118042 Primary medical qualification:

More information

3.2 The Code to maintain patient safety and public confidence in the profession.

3.2 The Code to maintain patient safety and public confidence in the profession. OUTCOME OF FITNESS TO PRACTISE HEARING Case Number 2013/01 Name Paul John Tallon Registration Number 3560 Date of Hearing 5 th 6 th and 14 th June 2013 The Notice of Allegation The Chairman of the Statutory

More information

Notice of Decision of the Northern Ireland Social Care Council s Conduct Committee

Notice of Decision of the Northern Ireland Social Care Council s Conduct Committee Notice of Decision of the Northern Ireland Social Care Council s Conduct Committee Name: Radu Nasca SCR No: 6005361 Date: 22 August 2014 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the Conduct Committee of the Northern

More information

Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Hearing 31 October 2016 Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), Regus, Cromac Square, Belfast BT2 8LA

Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Hearing 31 October 2016 Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), Regus, Cromac Square, Belfast BT2 8LA Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Hearing 31 October 2016 Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), Regus, Cromac Square, Belfast BT2 8LA Name of Registrant Nurse: NMC PIN: Aaron Ravel 91A1968E Part(s)

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations. Medical Practitioner: Dates: 19/06/ /06/2018 & 2 August GMC reference number:

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations. Medical Practitioner: Dates: 19/06/ /06/2018 & 2 August GMC reference number: PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 19/06/2018 21/06/2018 & 2 August 2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Muhammad Bhatti GMC reference number: 6067212 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Conviction / Caution

More information

Independent review of the Financial Reporting Council s enforcement procedures sanctions

Independent review of the Financial Reporting Council s enforcement procedures sanctions Independent review of the Financial Reporting Council s enforcement procedures sanctions Review Panel s call for submissions Comments from June 2017 (the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants)

More information

Notice of Decision of the Northern Ireland Social Care Council s Conduct Committee

Notice of Decision of the Northern Ireland Social Care Council s Conduct Committee Notice of Decision of the Northern Ireland Social Care Council s Conduct Committee Name: Paula Curran Registration No: 2002171 Date: 30 January 2013 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the Conduct Committee of

More information

Legal Services Act 2007 SRA (Disciplinary Procedure) Rules EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Legal Services Act 2007 SRA (Disciplinary Procedure) Rules EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SRA BOARD 15 January 2010 Public Item 6 CLASSIFICATION PUBLIC Summary Legal Services Act 2007 SRA (Disciplinary Procedure) Rules EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. This paper invites the SRA Board to decide on the appropriate

More information

Administrative Sanctions: imposing warnings and fines

Administrative Sanctions: imposing warnings and fines Administrative Sanctions: imposing warnings and fines Introduction This leaflet provides an overview of the Bar Standards Board s (BSB s) use of administrative sanctions as one of the tools available to

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Dates: 15/01/ /01/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Baldeep AUJLA

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Dates: 15/01/ /01/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Baldeep AUJLA PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 15/01/2018 23/01/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Baldeep AUJLA GMC reference number: 7084996 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Conviction / Caution New - Misconduct

More information

December 2016 Voluntary Removal from the Register in Fitness to Practice proceedings.

December 2016 Voluntary Removal from the Register in Fitness to Practice proceedings. December 2016 Voluntary Removal from the Register in Fitness to Practice proceedings. Introduction 1. This guidance sets out the relevant criteria and factors to consider in making decisions on applications

More information

If this declaration is more than three months old, we will ask you to complete a new one before we grant your application.

If this declaration is more than three months old, we will ask you to complete a new one before we grant your application. Please write clearly in black ink and use CAPITAL LETTERS All dates must be written in the format DD/MM/YYYY If you need more space please use the supplementary information sheet at the end of this form

More information

Who this guidance is for and when it should be used

Who this guidance is for and when it should be used References to Good medical practice updated in March 2013 Guidance for the Investigation Committee and case examiners when considering allegations about a doctor s involvement in encouraging or assisting

More information

SANCTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENT

SANCTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENT SANCTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENT November 2017 Introduction If a complaint is referred to the Disciplinary Committee of the Teaching Council for an inquiry, a panel of the Disciplinary Committee consisting of

More information

SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL. IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No and. Before:

SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL. IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No and. Before: The Tribunal s Order is subject to appeal to the High Court (Administrative Court) by the Respondent. The Order remains in force pending the High Court s decision on the appeal. SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY

More information

Indicative Sanctions Guidance

Indicative Sanctions Guidance Indicative Sanctions Guidance AAT is a registered charity. No. 1050724 Indicative Sanctions Guidance Contents Introduction... 3 Policy detail... 4 Sanctions... 5 Aggravating factors... 7 Mitigation...

More information

Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 Complaints and Discipline Process

Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 Complaints and Discipline Process Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 Complaints and Discipline Process The following notes have been prepared to explain the complaints process under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance

More information

GCC code of practice for criminal investigations and prosecutions under the Chiropractors Act 1994 July 2012

GCC code of practice for criminal investigations and prosecutions under the Chiropractors Act 1994 July 2012 GCC code of practice for criminal investigations and prosecutions under the Chiropractors Act 1994 July 2012-1 - GCC code of practice for criminal investigations and prosecutions under the Chiropractors

More information

Report of the Chair of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service

Report of the Chair of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service 10 December 2014 Council 5 To consider Report of the Chair of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service Issue 1 Reviewing the work of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS). 2 Council is asked

More information

Disciplinary Panel Hearing. Case of. Mr Jason Barkworth MRICS [ ] London SE7. On Wednesday 21 November At RICS 55 Colmore Row, Birmingham

Disciplinary Panel Hearing. Case of. Mr Jason Barkworth MRICS [ ] London SE7. On Wednesday 21 November At RICS 55 Colmore Row, Birmingham Disciplinary Panel Hearing Case of Mr Jason Barkworth MRICS [5044119] London SE7 On Wednesday 21 November 2018 At RICS 55 Colmore Row, Birmingham Panel Alison Sansome (Panel Chair) Gillian Seager (Lay

More information

Accountancy Scheme Sanctions Guidance

Accountancy Scheme Sanctions Guidance Guidance Financial Reporting Council April 2018 Accountancy Scheme Sanctions Guidance The FRC s mission is to promote transparency and integrity in business. The FRC sets the UK Corporate Governance and

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Date: 05/12/2017. Medical practitioner s name: Dr Wladyslaw Stanislaw STANEK

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Date: 05/12/2017. Medical practitioner s name: Dr Wladyslaw Stanislaw STANEK PUBLIC RECORD Date: 05/12/2017 Medical practitioner s name: Dr Wladyslaw Stanislaw STANEK GMC reference number: 7344756 Primary medical qualification: Type of case Review - Non-compliance with an English

More information

Guidance on the Investigating Committee s power to review a warning

Guidance on the Investigating Committee s power to review a warning Guidance on the Investigating Committee s power to review a warning 1 A. Introduction 1. On 13 April 2016, the General Dental Council (Fitness to Practise etc.) Order 2016 amended the Dentists Act 1984

More information

The Patent Regulation Board and The Trade Mark Regulation Board. Disciplinary Procedure Rules

The Patent Regulation Board and The Trade Mark Regulation Board. Disciplinary Procedure Rules The Patent Regulation Board and The Trade Mark Regulation Board Disciplinary Procedure Rules The Patent Regulation Board of the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys and the Trade Mark Regulation Board

More information

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Dates: 29/06/2018. Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Dariusz FAFERA

PUBLIC RECORD. Record of Determinations Medical Practitioners Tribunal. Dates: 29/06/2018. Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Dariusz FAFERA PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 29/06/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Dariusz FAFERA GMC reference number: 7396655 Primary medical qualification: Type of case Review - Non-compliance with an English language

More information

DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE FOR TEACHERS INCLUDING PRINCIPALS AND VICE-PRINCIPALS IN GRANT-AIDED SCHOOLS WITH FULLY DELEGATED BUDGETS

DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE FOR TEACHERS INCLUDING PRINCIPALS AND VICE-PRINCIPALS IN GRANT-AIDED SCHOOLS WITH FULLY DELEGATED BUDGETS DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE FOR TEACHERS INCLUDING PRINCIPALS AND VICE-PRINCIPALS IN GRANT-AIDED SCHOOLS WITH FULLY DELEGATED BUDGETS 1. PURPOSE AND PRINCIPLES 1.1 This procedure has been drawn up to provide

More information

Scottish Home and Health Department

Scottish Home and Health Department Scottish Home and Health Department 5t Andrew's House Edinburgh EH1 30E Room No. NUS Circular No 1990 (PCS)8 Circular Cancelled - SHM 49/1968 Telephone Direct Dialling 031-244 Switchboard 031-556 8400

More information

Guidance on making referrals to Disclosure Scotland

Guidance on making referrals to Disclosure Scotland Guidance on making referrals to Disclosure Scotland Introduction 1 This document provides guidance on our power to refer information to Disclosure Scotland (DS) when certain referral grounds are met. The

More information