Walking a narrow path—how regulators should approach matters where a criminal prosecution results in a conditional discharge (Wray v General Osteopathic Council (Court of Appeal))

Table of contents

• What are the practical implications of this case?
• What was the background?
• What did the court decide?
• Case details

Article summary

Corporate Crime analysis: A professional discipline tribunal should not rely upon a conviction where the matter was dealt with by conditional discharge. However, any admission of material facts by a registrant on a previous occasion, for example by a guilty plea before a criminal court, is admissible evidence to prove relevant facts before a professional discipline tribunal. The tribunal must take care to follow the correct procedure and to deal with it as a conduct matter. Where facts are admitted, the tribunal can hear further evidence before the tribunal consider their factual findings and whether the facts amount to unacceptable professional conduct (UPC). Alexander dos Santos, barrister at Serjeant’s Inn Chambers, considers the judgment of the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in Wray v General Osteopathic Council.