Blog
Press Round-Up: Regulatory and Professional Discipline – May 2026
Jack Garden
1 March 2012
E-Regulator: Gurpinar v Solicitors Regulation Authority [2012] EWHC 192 (Admin)
Where there is a lack of evidence of a respondent’s attempt to notify a tribunal and other parties of non-attendance, a Court was permitted to conclude that they had not been sent and, in the circumstances, a tribunal was permitted to proceed in absence under s.16(2) of the Solicitors (Disciplinary Proceedings) Rules 2007.
1 March 2012
E-Regulator: Levinge v Health Professions Council [2012] EWHC 135 (Admin)
In a case originally presented by Kingsley Napley, the principle set out in Southall v the General Medical Council [2010] EWCA Civ 407 was considered alongside the reasoning given by the Panel for dismissing expert evidence when making their decision.
1 March 2012
E-Regulator: McCarthy v Bar Standards Board, Visitors to the Inns of Court, 25 January 2012
Rule 7(1)(a) of the Disciplinary Hearing Rules requiring evidence to be served does include statements of witnesses and the withholding of statements to prevent a registrant ‘tempering’ his evidence around the statement is ‘unacceptable’.
1 March 2012
E-Regulator: Leathley v Bar Standards Board, Queens Bench Division, 20 January 2012
The payment of fees and expenses and the provision of training and guidance to Panel Members by the ‘regulator’ does not give rise to an appearance of bias.
1 March 2012
E-Regulator: Uddin v General Medical Council [2012] QBD (Admin)
A fitness to practise panel of the General Medical Council (GMC) were entitled to take into account findings it had made at the impairment stage of a fitness to practise hearing when considering the issue of sanction.