Table of contents
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Article summary
Local Government analysis: The court allowed the Professional Standards Authority’s (PSA) appeal and quashed and re-admitted the decision on sanction back to the Fitness to Practise Panel (‘Panel’) on the basis of serious procedural error in the form of inadequate and unclear reasoning. While the court felt unable to determine whether the decision on sanction was ‘wrong’ in the statutory sense, the court held the Panel had not complied with its duty to carefully apply the General Medical Council’s (GMC) Sanctions Guidance due to the inadequate reasons provided. This decision is significant for Fitness to Practise (FTP) practitioners given the courts general reluctance to interfere with a Panel’s decision. The factual particulars, therefore, along with the detailed reasons cited by the court are useful to note should a practitioner be considering an appeal on the grounds of insufficient reasoning. Written by Nicola Wheater, solicitor at Ridouts Professional Services Ltd.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial