Blog
Clearview AI ruling confirms UK GDPR applies beyond borders
Christopher Perrin
31 March 2015
Press Round-Up: Regulatory and Professional Discipline – February - March 2015
Recent news relating to the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC), General Medical Council (GMC), General Dental Council (GDC),Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) and Security Industry Authority (SIA).
18 March 2015
Case Update: Panel proceeds in the absence of the practitioner, and errs in its findings on dishonesty
Lawrance v GMC [2015] EWHC 586 (Admin)
Dr L, a General Practitioner (GP) lodged an appeal pursuant to section 40 of the Medical Act 1983 (the Act) in relation to a finding by a Fitness to Practise Panel of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) that her fitness to practise was impaired by reason of misconduct. The panel struck Dr L from the medical register.
13 March 2015
More faith in doctors and the General Medical Council needed
This week, the Daily Mail wrote an article 'More than 1,000 doctors are still practising despite convictions for sexual assault, possessing indecent pictures of children and threats to kill'.
This is exactly the sort of inaccurate and alarmist reportage that undermines the good work that both doctors and the GMC undertake on a daily basis. Let’s start with the basics: the GMC does not have the power to remove doctors from their ‘posts’ nor can it (or should it) be responsible for informing individual patients about a doctor’s record. The decision as to whether a doctor’s fitness to practise is impaired as a result of as conviction or caution is taken by an independently appointed committee of the MPTS. They hear all the evidence, submissions from lawyers for both sides and are skilled at weighing up very difficult and nuanced arguments whilst also being concerned for the protection of the profession’s reputation. All decisions of the MPTS are published on the website and are available for patients to see. Had the decisions the Daily Mail referred to been considered unduly lenient, a higher level of review is possible. What the article fails to cover is the circumstances of the offences listed which may have had a bearing on the outcome of those continuing to practice.
One final thing, Dr Bradbury was struck off by the MPTS meaning that he is no longer working as a doctor. So serious crimes do result in career bans. Need I say more.
12 March 2015
Case Update: High Court holds that GMC Panel should not have found consultant ophthalmologist to be dishonest
Soni v General Medical Council [2015] EWHC 364 (Admin)
Judgment date 25th January 2015
The Appellant a consultant ophthalmologist appealed to the High Court against the decision of a Fitness to Practise Panel (the “Panel”) of the General Medical Council (the “GMC”) that his fitness to practice was impaired by reason of his misconduct relating to his receiving payment for the treatment on Trust premises of five private patients.
25 February 2015
Case Update: Opening notes do not fix deficiencies of imprecise allegations, High Court re-iterates
R (on the application of Squier) v General Medical Council [2015] EWHC 299 (Admin)
Transcripts of judgments admissible and relevant in disciplinary proceedings as rebuttable prima facie evidence of underlying facts; sufficient particularisation to be within allegations and not within a draft opening note.
Decision date: 13th February 2015
The registrant faced fitness to practice proceedings relating to allegations that, in 6 cases between 2006 and 2010, she had failed to properly discharge her duties as an expert witness and had misled the courts. In each case she had given evidence as an expert consultant paediatric neuropathologist on the topic of alleged non-accidental head injury to infants (“shaken baby syndrome”).