Blog
From Certificates to Belief Statements: The CPS and the Limits of Forum Bar Intervention
Rebecca Niblock
6 July 2015
The end of the duty of candour double standard?
When things go wrong in healthcare, should the duty of candour owed by providers to patients differ depending on whether the care was provided within a primary or secondary setting? Or whether the patient received care from the public or private sector? A single duty of candour should apply consistently across the healthcare service. Unfortunately, the duty of candour is currently triggered by two different thresholds depending upon who provides care to the patient.
28 May 2015
Case Update: Clarity urgently required on the test for dishonesty in regulatory proceedings as Administrative Court unable to rule on the issue
Kirschner v General Dental Council [2015] EWHC 1377
Judgement Date: 19 May 2015
Further to the cases of PSA v HCPC and David [2014] EWHC 4657 and Hussain v GMC [2014] EWCA Civ 2246, additional judicial comment has been made about the appropriate test for dishonesty in regulatory proceedings in the instant case.
14 May 2015
Case Update: High Court terminate interim suspension of doctor facing gross negligence manslaughter charges following death of 6 year old child
Bawa-Garba v General Medical Council [2015] EWHC 1277
This was an appeal against the decision of an Interim Orders Panel (the Panel) of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) on 8 January 2015 to impose an interim suspension order on Dr Bawa-Garba for 18 months pending a final determination about her fitness to practice.
8 May 2015
Case Update: High Court makes clear that allegations are not to be amended to meet changing evidence at hearing
Professional Standards Authority and (1) The Health and Care Professions Council (2) Benedict Doree [2015] EWHC 822 (Admin)
The Professional Standards Authority (PSA) referred to the High Court a decision of the Conduct and Competence Committee (the Committee) of the Health and Care Profession Council (HCPC) made on 24 July 2014, in respect of registered prosthetist/orthotist, Mr Doree.
5 May 2015
Case Update: Can a Panel re-visit its decision and hear further evidence having provided a draft of its findings to the parties?
TZ v General Medical Council [2015] EWHC 1001
The appellant doctor (TZ) was working as a Locum Senior House Officer in the emergency department of a hospital in London on 6 February 2010. A female patient (A), who was a young woman, attended the hospital complaining of abdominal pain. She was seen by TZ who examined her. It was alleged that TZ had performed a vaginal examination which was not clinically indicated and using his ungloved hand. It was further alleged that his behaviour was inappropriate in that he asked A for her telephone number, asked her irrelevant personal questions, tried to make arrangements to meet her socially (and at his private clinic in Putney) and made comments of a sexual nature. TZ’s case was that he had examined A in the usual way. Whilst he had examined her on his own and without a chaperone, he had not performed a vaginal examination. He said that he had taken her telephone number only because it was not in the medical notes. It is relevant to note that at the time of this examination and consultation, a Health Care Assistant (HCA) was working in the relevant department. Her evidence was potentially material.