Category: Health Professions

Powell v United Kingdom: ECHR 4 May 2000

A ten-year old boy had died from Addison’s disease. No inquest took place, because the coroner decided that the boy had died of natural causes. The parents, who were also affected by the events, had accepted compensation from the local health authority, and discontinued a claim for damages for negligence against the doctors, and a claim against those doctors for alleged falsification of records had been struck out. They complained about the falsification of these records. They had abandoned an appeal against a decision of a local NHS Medical Services Committee with which they were dissatisfied, and had not pursued their negligence claim against the doctors to trial.
Held: The case was rejected as inadmissible: ‘an applicant must be able to demonstrate an arguable claim under domestic law that there has been a breach of a civil right actionable in law. It is still impermissible for the Court to arrogate to itself the task of creating in favour of an individual a substantive right where none is recognised under domestic law’ and ‘it cannot accept that matters such as error of judgment on the part of a health professional or negligent co-ordination among health professionals in the treatment of a particular patient are sufficient of themselves to call a Contracting State to account from the standpoint of its positive obligations under Article 2 of the Convention to protect life.’

Citations:

45305/99, (2000) 30 EHRR CD 152, [2000] ECHR 703

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 2

Citing:

Cited – LCB v United Kingdom ECHR 9-Jun-1998
The applicant’s father had been present on Christmas Island during British nuclear tests. She was diagnosed with leukaemia. She claimed the UK had been should have warned her parents of the risks associated with exposure to radiation and monitored . .

Cited by:

Cited – Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2) HL 10-Jul-2003
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its . .
Cited – Khan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health CA 10-Oct-2003
The claimant’s child had died as a result of negligence in hospital. The parents had been told the result of police investigation and decision not to prosecute, and the hospital’s own investigation, but had not been sufficiently involved. There . .
Cited – Middleton, Regina (on the Application of) v Coroner for the Western District of Somerset HL 11-Mar-2004
The deceased had committed suicide in prison. His family felt that the risk should have been known to the prison authorities, and that they had failed to guard against that risk. The coroner had requested an explanatory note from the jury.
Cited – Plymouth City Council v HM Coroner for the County of Devon and Another Admn 27-May-2005
The local authority in whose care the deceased child had been held challenged a decision by the coroner not to limit his inquiry to the last few days of the child’s life. The coroner had decided that he had an obligation to conduct a wider enquiry . .
Cited – Takoushis, Regina (on the Application of) v HM Coroner for Inner North London and others CA 30-Nov-2005
Relatives sought judicial review of the coroner’s decision not to allow a jury, and against allowance of an expert witness. The deceased had been a mental patient but had been arrested with a view to being hospitalised. He was taken first to the . .
Cited – K v Central and North West London Mental Health NHS Trust and Another QBD 30-May-2008
The claimant appealed against an order striking out his claim in negligence. He had leaped from a window in a suicide attempt. The accommodation was provided by the defendant whilst caring for him under the 1983 Act.
Held: The case should be . .
Cited – Savage v South Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (MIND intervening) HL 10-Dec-2008
The deceased had committed suicide on escaping from a mental hospital. The Trust appealed against a refusal to strike out the claim that that they had been negligent in having inadequate security.
Held: The Trust’s appeal failed. The fact that . .
Cited – Rabone and Another v Pennine Care NHS Trust CA 21-Jun-2010
The claimant’s daughter had committed suicide after being given home leave on a secure ward by the respondent mental hospital. A claim in negligence had been settled, but the parents now appealed refusal of their claim that the hospital had failed . .
Cited – Birks, Regina (On the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis Admn 25-Sep-2014
The claimant police officer sought judicial review of a decision to continue his suspension. He had been investigated and cleared after a death in custody. He sought to join the Church of England Ministry and was offered a post. He was re-assured . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Health Professions

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184429

Skidmore v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust: HL 22 May 2003

The disciplinary code for doctors employed by the NHS provides different procedures cases involving allegations of ‘professional conduct’ or ‘personal conduct.’ The first would involve a more judicial process, and the second a more informal disciplinary process. The allegations were of having misled others both patients and authorities, and had been treated as personal conduct. The CA had decided that it was properly classified as professional misconduct.
Held: No public law considerations applied. The Trust made the decision, but must do so within the contract. Here, the decision was clearly flawed since the acts complained of were part of the claimant’s professional conduct. Acts committed as part of a professional practice were to distinguished from acts for which the professional practice provided opportunity.
Lord Steyn said: ‘It is common ground . . that the questions before the House must be resolved within the framework of the contract between Mr Skidmore and the trust. That is so despite the fact that a public body is involved. Prima facie therefore the position is as follows. The trust is entitled to decide what disciplinary route should be followed. That decision must, however, comply with the terms of the contract. If a non-conforming decision is taken and acted upon, there is a breach of contract resulting in the usual remedies. The only escape from this position would be if it could be shown that the parties agreed upon wording in their contract making it clear that the employer’s decision would be final thereby excluding the role of the court except, of course, in cases of bad faith or possibly the absence of reasonable grounds for the decision. There is no such provision in the present contract. It does, of course, provide that ‘It is for the authority to decide under which category a case falls’. This provision merely states the obvious: the trust must take the initial decision to commence the appropriate disciplinary procedure. It is, however, quite insufficient to exclude the normal consequences of a failure to follow the agreed contractual procedures. If there has been a breach by the trust in adopting the wrong procedure, Mr Skidmore is entitled to appropriate relief.’

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Steyn, Lord Clyde, Lord Hutton, Lord Scott of Foscote

Citations:

[2003] UKHL 27, Times 23-May-2003, Gazette 10-Jul-2003, [2003] Lloyds Rep Med 369, (2003) 73 BMLR 209, [2003] ICR 721, [2003] IRLR 445, [2003] 3 All ER 292

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Department of Health Circular HC (90)9

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Skidmore v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust CA 15-Jan-2002
The appellant was a doctor accused of lying to a patient about the details of an operation. He appealed a decision dismissing him.
Held: Such an allegation was an allegation of professional misconduct, and should have been dealt with as such, . .
Approved – Dr Mohammed Saeed v Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust CA 20-Dec-2000
Where disciplinary proceedings were contemplated against an employee who might be subject to alternative contractual and professional complaints procedures, the employer must look to the contract to decide which procedure was to be followed. If the . .
Cited – Chatterjee v City and Hackney Community Services NHS Trust ChD 1998
Unless there was some bad faith or other unreasonableness it was for the employer Health authority to categorise the conduct of which complaint was made about a doctor as either personal or professional. . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Health, Ex parte Guirguis CA 1990
The secretary of state did not have jurisdiction to intervene in disciplinary proceedings to say whether a doctor had properly been dismissed where the allegation was of personal rather than professional misconduct. . .
Cited – Kramer v South Bedforshire Health Care Trust ChD 16-Oct-1995
It was for the Trust employer to decide which kind of disciplinary proceedings to institute. Absent bad faith or Wednesbury unreasonableness, the employer’s decision on categorisation was final. There can be no reason otherwise to include in the . .
Cited – Niarchos (London) Ltd v Shell Tankers Ltd 1961
. .
Cited – West of England Ship Owners Mutual Insurance Association (Luxembourg) v Cristal Ltd (The Glacier Bay) CA 26-Oct-1995
An agreement giving to a ‘sole judge’ the power to make a final decision was effective, and there was no appeal from his decision. The defendant’s decision in his capacity as Convention administrator was as a final arbiter and was unreviewable.
Cited – R E Brown and others v GIO Insurance Limited CA 6-Feb-1998
A reinsurance contact provided for an excess and limit of liability to be calculated on the basis of ‘each and every loss and/or series of losses arising out of one event.’ It also provided that ‘The Reassured shall be the sole judge as to what . .
Cited – Bhanot v South West London and St George’s Mental Hospital NHS Trust ChD 2000
The court considered its jurisdiction to intervene in disciplinary proceedings against a doctor, where the Trust had decided the allegation was of personal misconduct.
Held: This was an action for breach of contract and what the court was . .
At EAT – F D Skidmore v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust EAT 22-Feb-2001
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Reason for dismissal including substantial other reason. . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Skidmore v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust CA 15-Jan-2002
The appellant was a doctor accused of lying to a patient about the details of an operation. He appealed a decision dismissing him.
Held: Such an allegation was an allegation of professional misconduct, and should have been dealt with as such, . .
Cited – Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust QBD 31-Jul-2009
The claimant, a consultant surgeon had been subject to disciplinary proceedings by his employer. They were however conducted in a manner which breached his contract. The GMC had summarily dismissed the same allegations. The claimant now appealed . .
Cited – Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust CA 26-May-2010
The claimant, a consultant doctor, sought damages saying that his employer had failed to follow the contract when disciplining and dismissing him. The GMC had dismissed as unfounded the allegation on which the dismissal was based. He sought damages . .
Cited – Mattu v The University Hospitals of Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust QBD 1-Aug-2011
The claimant who had been dismissed by the defendant, asked the court to find that the defendant had failed to meet its contractual obligations as to the procedure to be followed, and that therefore the court declare the dismissal void.
Held: . .
Cited – Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust SC 14-Dec-2011
The claimant had been employed as consultant surgeon. He had been dismissed in a manner inconsistent with the extress terms of his employment contract. He sought common law damages for the manner of his dismissal. The employer appealed.
Held: . .
Cited – Ezsias v North Glamorgan NHS Trust EAT 18-Mar-2011
EAT CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT – Disciplinary and grievance procedure
UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reason for dismissal including substantial other reason
(1) An employee who has been dismissed because of the . .
Cited – Charles Stanley and Co Ltd v Adams QBD 19-Jul-2013
The claimant stock broking firm sought to recover its uninsured losses after having paid out for what was said to have been negligent advice by the respondent, a self-employed broker working for them.
Held: The power to recover such losses . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.182481

British Medical Association v Chaudhary: CA 15 May 2003

The claimant had sought registration as a specialist medical practitioner by the respondent. His complaint that the crtiria used to reject his claim were discriminatory had been rejected by the employment tribunal and EAT on the basis that they had no jurisdiction.
Held: The section and rules establishing the Training authority clearly reserved to that authority exclusive jurisdiction, and the tribunal had been right to decline to hear it.

Judges:

Lord Justice Mummery Lord Justice Pill Lord Justice Latham

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 645, Times 20-May-2003, [2003] ICR 1512

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Race Relations Act 1976 54(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Brind HL 7-Feb-1991
The Home Secretary had issued directives to the BBC and IBA prohibiting the broadcasting of speech by representatives of proscribed terrorist organisations. The applicant journalists challenged the legality of the directives on the ground that they . .
Cited – Khan v General Medical Council CA 11-Apr-1994
The appellant’s application for full registration as a qualified medical practitioner had been refused by the GMC after a five-year maximum period of limited registration. His application for full registration in accordance with section 25 of the . .
Cited – Allsop v North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council CA 1991
The district auditor declared that payments made by the Council under an ‘enhanced voluntary severance scheme’, established by it in connection with its policy of not making employees compulsorily redundant, were unlawful. The payments were . .
See Also – British Medical Association v Chaudhary CA 1-Nov-2002
. .
Cited – Owusu v London Fire and Civil Defence Authority EAT 1-Mar-1995
The employee complained of his employer’s repeated failure to regrade him, and alleged discrimination. The employer said his claim was out of time.
Held: Mummery J made the distinction between single acts of discrimination, and continuing . .

Cited by:

Cited – Prakash v Wolverhampton City Council EAT 1-Sep-2006
EAT The Claimant was employed on a fixed term contract. During the terms of the contract he was dismissed for misconduct and made an application to the Employment Tribunal (ET) claiming unfair dismissal. He . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions, Discrimination

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.182223

Tait v The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons: PC 20 Mar 2003

PC The Disciplinary Committee of the RCVS

Citations:

[2003] UKPC 34

Links:

PC, Bailii, PC

Cited by:

Cited – Drysdale v The Department of Transport (The Maritime and Coastguard Agency) CA 31-Jul-2014
The claimant had been represented at his claim before the employment tribunal by his wife, acting as a lay representative. She asked to be allowed to withdraw the complaint. Without asking her, the complaint was dismissed, and costs awarded against . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.181035

Doctor Beynon and Partners v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: CA 20 Dec 2002

The appellants were doctors practicing far from a pharmacy. They themselves administered rather than dispensed drugs direct to their clients under the regulation. They appealed a finding that the supplies were exempt supplies, asserting instead that they were zero-rated. The NHS refused to make an allowance against VAT paid on drugs supplied to regulation 20 patients.
Held: The judge had viewed the issue as one of fact. That was incorrect. The aim of the patient was to be diagnosed and then to receive treatment. In a general sense that was one supply, but in the context of this question, that was the wrong level of generality. Here there were two supplies, and the supply of the drug was zero-rated.

Judges:

Lord Justice Aldous Lord Justice Chadwick Mr Justice Munby

Citations:

Times 15-Jan-2003, [2002] EWCA Civ 1870

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Health Service (Pharmaceutical Services) Regulations 1992 (1992 No 662) 20, Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch8 Grp12 1A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Doctor Beynon and Partners v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ChD 2002
. .
Cited – Beynon and Partners v Customs and Excise HL 25-Nov-2004
The House asked whether the personal administration of a drug such as a vaccine by an NHS doctor to a patient is a taxable supply for the purposes of value added tax. The provision of medical care in the exercise of the medical and paramedical . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Beynon and Partners v Customs and Excise HL 25-Nov-2004
The House asked whether the personal administration of a drug such as a vaccine by an NHS doctor to a patient is a taxable supply for the purposes of value added tax. The provision of medical care in the exercise of the medical and paramedical . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Health Professions

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178546

Afshar v Chester: CA 27 May 2002

The surgeon carried out the operation successfully, but the claimant suffered consequential post operative damage. He had not been warned of the risk, and sought damages.
Held: Failure to warn of a risk did not vitiate consent, and any liability was in negligence not trespass (Chatterton) The doctor must still properly inform the patient of risks so that the patient can take an informed decision in consenting. The Chappel case was properly followed, and the doctor was liable in negligence.

Judges:

Lady Justice Hale

Citations:

Times 13-Jun-2002, Gazette 18-Jul-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 724, [2003] QB 356, [2002] 3 All ER 552, [2002] 3 WLR 1195, 67 BMLR 66

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Chatterton v Gerson QBD 1980
The doctor failed to explain possible consequences of an operation both on a first operation, and on a subsequent corrective operation.
Held: The failure to explain the general nature of an operation negatived the patient’s consent. The doctor . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Chester v Afshar HL 14-Oct-2004
The claimant suffered back pain for which she required neurosurgery. The operation was associated with a 1-2% risk of the cauda equina syndrome, of which she was not warned. She went ahead with the surgery, and suffered that complication. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Professional Negligence, Health Professions

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171338

Chaudhary v The Specialist Training Authority of the Medical Royal Colleges and 8 others: EAT 20 Nov 2001

EAT Race Discrimination – Jurisdiction
EAT Race Discrimination – Jurisdiction.

Judges:

His Honour Judge Peter Clark

Citations:

EAT/1410/00, [2001] UKEAT 1410 – 00 – 2011

Links:

Bailii, EAT

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Dr H Platt, NHS Executive HQ, Department Of Health v R Chaudhary and Others, R Chaudhary and others EAT 20-Dec-2001
The Authority and other respondents appealed a refusal to strike out the applicant’s claim as an abuse of process, on the basis that other proceedings were current between the same parties at another tribunal. Abuse of process is distinct from cause . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination, Health Professions

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171606

Tehrani for Judicial Review of A Purported Decision of the United Kingdon Central Council for Nursing: SCS 25 Jan 2001

Judges:

Lord Mackay of Drumadoon

Citations:

[2001] ScotCS 19

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

See Also – Tehrani v Argyll and Clyde Health Board 1989
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.169117

Dr H Platt, NHS Executive HQ, Department Of Health v R Chaudhary and Others, R Chaudhary and others: EAT 20 Dec 2001

The Authority and other respondents appealed a refusal to strike out the applicant’s claim as an abuse of process, on the basis that other proceedings were current between the same parties at another tribunal. Abuse of process is distinct from cause of action estoppel, and issue estoppel, but has in common that litigation should be final and a party should not be twice vexed in the same matter.
Held: The chairman was in error. A tribunal could add an amendment to a claim raising matters occurring after the claim had been issued despite earlier cases to the contrary. It was not clear that the matters raised in the new proceedings could properly be tried as part of the proceedings in the other tribunal, and accordingly the new proceedings were not an abuse of process.
EAT Procedural Issues – Employment Tribunal

Judges:

His Honour Judge Peter Clark

Citations:

EAT/1101/00, EAT/1100/00, [2001] UKEAT 1100 – 00 – 2012

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Johnson v Gore Wood and Co HL 14-Dec-2000
Shareholder May Sue for Additional Personal Losses
A company brought a claim of negligence against its solicitors, and, after that claim was settled, the company’s owner brought a separate claim in respect of the same subject-matter.
Held: It need not be an abuse of the court for a shareholder . .
See Also – Chaudhary v The Specialist Training Authority of the Medical Royal Colleges and 8 others EAT 20-Nov-2001
EAT Race Discrimination – Jurisdiction
EAT Race Discrimination – Jurisdiction. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination, Health Professions

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168490

Chaudhary v The Senate of the Royal College of Surgeons Of Great Britain and Ireland and Others, NHS Executive Headquarters, Department of Health, NHS Executive North West, The Postgraduate Dean North West Deanery etc: EAT 19 Jul 2001

EAT Race Discrimination – Direct

Judges:

Miss Recorder Elizabeth Slade QC

Citations:

EAT/975/99, [2001] UKEAT 975 – 99 – 1907

Links:

Bailii, EAT

Citing:

Cited – Owusu v London Fire and Civil Defence Authority EAT 1-Mar-1995
The employee complained of his employer’s repeated failure to regrade him, and alleged discrimination. The employer said his claim was out of time.
Held: Mummery J made the distinction between single acts of discrimination, and continuing . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Health Professions

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168276

A Health Authority v Dr X and Others: CA 21 Dec 2001

Where, after a children case has been heard, a party wishes to apply for the release of papers, the application should be made before the judge who had heard the case. To do otherwise left the second judge making a difficult assessment with insufficient direct knowledge of the issues and people involved.

Judges:

Lord Justice Thorpe, Lord Justice Laws and Mr Justice Harrison

Citations:

[2002] 1 FLR 1045, Times 01-Feb-2002, [2001] Lloyds (Medical) 349, [2001] EWCA Civ 2014, [2002] Fam Law 342, [2002] 2 All ER 780, [2002] 2 FCR 357

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – A Health Authority v X (Discovery: Medical Conduct) FD 2001
There is a compelling public interest in authorising the disclosure of documents to the General Medical Council if they ‘are or may be relevant to the General Medical Council carrying out its statutory duties to protect the public against possible . .

Cited by:

Cited – H (A Healthcare Worker) v Associated Newspapers Limited CA 27-Feb-2002
The applicant had been a health care worker, but was no longer working. He had come to be HIV positive, and an order was sought protecting his identity from disclosure in the press. He had evidence that the NHS guidelines on notification of patients . .
Cited – British Broadcasting Corporation v CAFCASS Legal and others FD 30-Mar-2007
Parents of a child had resisted care proceedings, and now wished the BBC to be able to make a TV programme about their case. They applied to the court for the judgment to be released. Applications were also made to have a police officer’s and . .
Cited – Re C (A Child) FC 29-Sep-2015
There had been care proceedings as to C. The mother was treated by a psychiatrist, X, and an associate Y. They also prepared expert reports. M formally complained about X, and the charges having been dismissed, the doctors now sought disclosure of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Children, Health Professions

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167523

Vasant (T/A Mk Vasant and Associates) and Others v NhS Commissioning Board: QBD 7 Nov 2018

Claim for declaratory and, if appropriate, injunctive relief in respect of contractual arrangements between the claimants, who are registered general dental practitioners and the defendant, the NHS Commissioning Board, commonly known as ‘NHS England’.

Judges:

Mr Justice Murray

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 3002 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health Professions

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.628231

Webster and Others v Liddington and Others: CA 7 May 2014

The court was asked ‘whether clinicians are responsible for statements in manufacturers’ brochures for cosmetic treatment, which they give to prospective patients without any disclaimer. The second issue is whether certain statements in those brochures constitute misrepresentations, if they fail to disclose the presence of small traces of bovine material in the substance to be administered.’

Citations:

[2014] EWCA Civ 560

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health Professions, Contract

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.525123

Skidmore v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust: CA 15 Jan 2002

The appellant was a doctor accused of lying to a patient about the details of an operation. He appealed a decision dismissing him.
Held: Such an allegation was an allegation of professional misconduct, and should have been dealt with as such, and not by way of dismissal and the employment tribunal system. Professional misconduct was defined in the section as ‘Performance or behaviour of practitioners arising from the exercise of medical or dental skills’ In the case of doubt it would normally be preferable for a Health authority to proceed on the basis that it was profession not personal misconduct. The reply was given as part of the performance of his professional duties.

Judges:

Lord Justice Aldous, Lord Justice Keene and Sir Christopher Slade

Citations:

Times 18-Jan-2002, Gazette 06-Mar-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 18, (2003) 69 BMLR 13, [2002] ICR 403, [2002] Lloyd’s Rep Med 299

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Department of Health Circular 90(9)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Followed – Dr Mohammed Saeed v Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust CA 20-Dec-2000
Where disciplinary proceedings were contemplated against an employee who might be subject to alternative contractual and professional complaints procedures, the employer must look to the contract to decide which procedure was to be followed. If the . .
Appealed to – Skidmore v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust HL 22-May-2003
The disciplinary code for doctors employed by the NHS provides different procedures cases involving allegations of ‘professional conduct’ or ‘personal conduct.’ The first would involve a more judicial process, and the second a more informal . .
Appeal from – F D Skidmore v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust EAT 22-Feb-2001
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Reason for dismissal including substantial other reason. . .
Appeal from – F D Skidmore v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust EAT 22-Feb-2001
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Reason for dismissal including substantial other reason. . .
see Also – Skidmore v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust CA 7-Jun-2001
. .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Skidmore v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust HL 22-May-2003
The disciplinary code for doctors employed by the NHS provides different procedures cases involving allegations of ‘professional conduct’ or ‘personal conduct.’ The first would involve a more judicial process, and the second a more informal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Health Professions, Employment, Damages

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167395

Regina v Dental Practice Board, ex parte Z and Another: QBD 6 Mar 2001

The Dental Practice Board did not have power to suspend payments to a dentist who was under investigation for possible fraud. The wording of the regulations demonstrated an intention to protect a practitioner whose entire livelihood and reputation was under threat.

Citations:

Times 06-Mar-2001

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health Professions

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.88434

Regina v General Medical Council, ex parte Richards: QBD 24 Jan 2001

The General Medical Council, when they conducted a preliminary proceeding, should not, in any case involving substantial conflicts of evidence, seek itself to resolve those conflicts. To do so would be to usurp the function of the professional conduct committee. The task of the council was to act to screen out cases, not to decide them. In this case, no reasonable committee could to have been so persuaded of the accuracy of the evidence as to conclude that no question was raised for the GMC. The proceedings are not those of a criminal court, and the committee had an important regulatory and investigatory role.

Judges:

Sullivan J

Citations:

Times 24-Jan-2001, [2001] Lloyds Med Rep 47

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Henshall v General Medical Council and others CA 13-Dec-2005
The claimant had lodged a complaint against a medical practitioner. The preliminary proceedings committee had accepted evidence from the doctor, but had not given the complainant opportunity to see it and comment upon it.
Held: the rules must . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.88469

In Re L (By His Next Friend GE); Regina v Bournewood Community and Mental Health NHS Trust, Ex Parte L: HL 25 Jun 1998

The applicant was an adult autistic, unable to consent to medical treatment. Treatment was provided at a day centre. He had been detained informally under the Act and against the wishes of his carers, but the Court of Appeal decided he should have been formally detained.
Held: The appeal succeeded. His detention had not been so complete as to constitute the tort of false imprisonment. The appellant had been properly detained using the informal procedure. The medical steps taken were valid under the common law doctrine of necessity. Under the common law doctrine of necessity there was power to detain and restrain patients who lack capacity and where detention was necessary in their own best interests.
Lord Steyn identified the existence of a lacuna: ‘The common law principle of necessity is a useful concept but it contains none of the safeguards of the 1983 Act. It places effective and unqualified control in the hands of the hospital psychiatrists . . neither habeas corpus nor judicial review are sufficient safeguards against misjudgements and professional lapses in the case of compliant incapacitated patients.’

Judges:

Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Nolan, Lord Steyn, Lord hope of Craighead

Citations:

Gazette 22-Jul-1998, Times 30-Jun-1998, [1998] UKHL 24, [1998] Fam Law 592, [1999] AC 458, [1998] 3 All ER 289, [1998] 3 WLR 107, [1998] 2 FLR 550, [1998] 2 FCR 501

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At CA – Regina v Bournewood Community and Mental Health NHS Trust, Ex parte L CA 2-Dec-1997
The applicant was severely autistic, and unable to consent to medical treatment. He had been admitted voluntarly to a mental hospital and detained under common law powers. The Hospital trust appealed a finding that his detention had been unlawful. . .
Distinguished – Black v Forsey HL 20-May-1988
The common law was called in aid to supplement the statutory power of compulsory detention to fill a lacuna which had appeared in the 1984 Act.
Held: The common law could not be invoked for that purpose, because the powers of detention . .
Cited – In re F (Mental Patient: Sterilisation) HL 4-May-1989
Where a patient lacks capacity, there is the power to provide him with whatever treatment or care is necessary in his own best interests. Medical treatment can be undertaken in an emergency even if, through a lack of capacity, no consent had been . .
Cited – Syed Mahamad Yusuf-ud-Din v Secretary of State for India 1903
For the tort of false imprisonment to be committed, the deprivation of liberty must be actual, rather than potential: ‘Nothing short of actual detention and complete loss of freedom would support an action for false imprisonment.’ . .
Cited – Meering v Grahame-White Aviation Co Ltd CA 1919
An unconscious or drugged person may be detained. For the tort of false imprisonment there must be shown a complete restriction in fact on the plaintiff’s freedom to move: ‘any restraint within defined bounds which is a restraint in fact may be an . .
Cited – Rex v Coate 1772
There is a common law power to detain persons for their own protection for mental health reasons. . .
Cited – Scott v Wakem 1862
If it could be shown to be necessary to protect him from harming himself, the common law gave power for a man to be detained. . .
Cited – Symm v Fraser 1863
The common law permitted the detention of those who were a danger, or potential danger, to themselves or others, in so far as this was shown to be necessary. . .
Cited – Murray v Ministry of Defence HL 25-May-1988
The plaintiff complained that she had been wrongfully arrested by a soldier, since he had not given a proper reason for her detention.
Held: The House accepted the existence of an implied power in a statute which would be necessary to ensure . .
Cited – Dallinson v Caffery 1965
When considering an allegation of false imprisonment, the element of detention or imprisonment is a pure issue of fact for the jury and the element of justification is one in which the judge has a role to play. . .
Cited – Collins v Wilcock QBD 1984
The defendant appealed against her conviction for assaulting a police constable in the execution of his duty. He had sought to caution her with regard to activity as a prostitute. The 1959 Act gave no power to detain, but he took hold of her. She . .
Cited – Regina v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison, Ex parte Hague, Weldon v Home Office HL 24-Jul-1991
The prisoner challenged the decision to place him in segregation under Prison Rule 43. Under rule 43(1) the initial power to segregate was given to ‘the governor’. The case arose from the fact that the governor of one prison had purported to . .
At Admn – L v Bournewood Community and Mental Health NHS Trust Admn 9-Oct-1997
L was adult autistic. He had been admitted to mental hospital for fear of his self-harming behaviours, and detained informally. He complained that that detention was unlawful.
Held: The continued detention of a mental health patient who is . .

Cited by:

Cited – L v United Kingdom ECHR 5-Oct-2004
The claimant had suffered mental illness and threatened to hurt himself. He was taken into hospital as a voluntary patient, but in effect detained compulsorily. He lacked capacity to consent to medical treatment.
Held: The holding of a patient . .
At House of Lords – HL v United Kingdom ECHR 2004
Lack of Patient Safeguards was Infringement
The claimant had been detained at a mental hospital as in ‘informal patient’. He was an autistic adult. He had been recommended for release by the Mental Health Review Tribunal, and it was decided that he should be released. He was detained further . .
Cited – Regina v Ashworth Hospital Authority (Now Mersey Care National Health Service Trust) ex parte Munjaz HL 13-Oct-2005
The claimant was detained in a secure Mental Hospital. He complained at the seclusions policy applied by the hospital, saying that it departed from the Guidance issued for such policies by the Secretary of State under the Act.
Held: The House . .
Cited – MH v Secretary of State for the Department of Health and others HL 20-Oct-2005
The appellant, detained for assessment under section 2, was too disabled to make an application to the court on her own behalf. After a dispute between her mother and the medical officer over her treatment, an application was made to the county . .
Cited – In re PS (an Adult), Re; City of Sunderland v PS by her litigation friend the Offcial Solcicitor and CA; Re PS (Incapacitated or Vulnerable Adult) FD 9-Mar-2007
The patient an elderly lady with limited mental capacity was to be returned from hospital, but her daughter said she was to come home. The local authority sought to prevent this, wanting to return her to a residential unit where she had lived for . .
Cited – In Re F (Adult: Court’s Jurisdiction) CA 25-Jul-2000
The local authority sought a declaration as to its rights to control the daily activities of an eighteen year old, who was incapable of managing her own affairs but was not subject to mental health legislation.
Held: There remained an inherent . .
Cited – Rabone and Another v Pennine Care NHS Trust CA 21-Jun-2010
The claimant’s daughter had committed suicide after being given home leave on a secure ward by the respondent mental hospital. A claim in negligence had been settled, but the parents now appealed refusal of their claim that the hospital had failed . .
At HL – HL v United Kingdom ECHR 10-Sep-2002
(Admissibility) Whether a detention amounts to a deprivation of liberty depends upon all the facts and circumstances of the particular case . .
Cited – G v E and Others CoP 26-Mar-2010
E Was born with and still suffered severe learning difficulties. The court was asked as to the extent of his capacity to make decisions, and as to where he should live, with a family member, the carer or with the local authority, which had removed . .
Cited – Nicklinson v Ministry of Justice and Others QBD 12-Mar-2012
The claimant suffered locked-in syndrome and sought relief in a form which would allow others to assist him in committing suicide. The court considered whether the case should be allowed to proceed rather than to be struck out as hopeless.
Cited – Re DE, JE v DE, Surrey County Council and EW FD 29-Dec-2006
JE, wife of DE, who had been taken into residential care by the Local authority, said that the authority had infringed his Article 5 and 8 rights on transferring him between homes. The authority asserted that he did not have mental capacity. She . .
At HL – L v United Kingdom ECHR 5-Oct-2004
The claimant had suffered mental illness and threatened to hurt himself. He was taken into hospital as a voluntary patient, but in effect detained compulsorily. He lacked capacity to consent to medical treatment.
Held: The holding of a patient . .
Cited – Jalloh, Regina (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department SC 12-Feb-2020
Claim for damages for false imprisonment brought in judicial review proceedings challenging the legality of a curfew imposed upon the claimant, purportedly under paragraph 2(5) of Schedule 3 to the Immigration Act 1971.
Held: The Court of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Health Professions, Torts – Other

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.135169

Dr Hossain v The General Medical Council: PC 2 Oct 2001

(Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC) The doctor appealed a decision of the Council removing his name from the register. He was criticised in four cases of not attending patients at home. The question was whether removal was the appropriate remedy. In this case removal was inappropriate.
Held: The council had failed to take account of the doctor’s good record. The committee had failed to say why other alternatives had been rejected. In view of the doctor’s wish to work now on a sessional basis only, the decision was set aside, with a request that the committee consider whether conditions might be attached to his practice.

Judges:

Lord Hoffmann, Lord Cooke of Thorndon, Sir Andrew Leggatt

Citations:

[2001] UKPC 39, Appeal No 77 of 2000

Links:

PC, Bailii, PC, PC

Statutes:

Medical Act 1983 36(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health Professions

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.166563

Kramer v South Bedforshire Health Care Trust: ChD 16 Oct 1995

It was for the Trust employer to decide which kind of disciplinary proceedings to institute. Absent bad faith or Wednesbury unreasonableness, the employer’s decision on categorisation was final. There can be no reason otherwise to include in the contract this provision that categorisation is a matter for the trust.

Judges:

Lightman J

Citations:

Times 16-Oct-1995, [1995] ICR 1066

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Applied – Chatterjee v City and Hackney Community Services NHS Trust ChD 1998
Unless there was some bad faith or other unreasonableness it was for the employer Health authority to categorise the conduct of which complaint was made about a doctor as either personal or professional. . .
Cited – Skidmore v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust HL 22-May-2003
The disciplinary code for doctors employed by the NHS provides different procedures cases involving allegations of ‘professional conduct’ or ‘personal conduct.’ The first would involve a more judicial process, and the second a more informal . .
Not followed – Bhanot v South West London and St George’s Mental Hospital NHS Trust ChD 2000
The court considered its jurisdiction to intervene in disciplinary proceedings against a doctor, where the Trust had decided the allegation was of personal misconduct.
Held: This was an action for breach of contract and what the court was . .
Preferred – Saeed v Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust 2000
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Health Professions

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.82837

MS v Sweden: ECHR 27 Aug 1997

Hudoc Sweden – communication, without the patient’s consent, of personal and confidential medical data by one public authority to another and lack of possibility for patient, prior to the measure, to challenge it before a court (Secrecy Act 1980 and Industrial Injury Insurance Act 1976)
The applicant having sustained an injury objected to disclosure of medical records to the Social Insurance Office to allow assessment of her compensation claim.
Held: The object of the disclosure was proper – to enable the office to determine whether the conditions for granting compensation had been met. It also recognised the ‘fundamental importance’ of protecting personal data, guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention. It then ‘examine[d] whether, in the light of the case as a whole, the reasons adduced to justify the interference were relevant and sufficient and whether the measure was proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued.’ The court noted that the information was ‘communicated by one public institution to another in the context of an assessment of whether she satisfied the legal conditions for obtaining a benefit which she herself had requested.’ Under the relevant law it was a condition of imparting the information that the office had requested it, and the office was under a duty to treat it as confidential: ‘The Court considers that there were relevant and sufficient reasons for the communication of the applicant’s medical records by the clinic to the office and that the measure was not disproportionate to the legitimate aim pursued. Accordingly, it concludes that there has been no violation of the applicant’s right to respect for her private life, as guaranteed by Article 8 of the convention’ though ‘respecting the confidentiality of health data is a vital principle in the legal systems of all contracting parties to the Convention’.

Citations:

20837/92, [1997] ECHR 49, [1999] 28 EHRR 313, 3 BHRC 248

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd) v Serious Fraud Office CA 11-Nov-2004
In 2002 the SFO was investigating allegations that drug companies were selling generic drugs, including penicillin-based antibiotics and warfarin, to the National Health Service at artificially sustained prices. To further the investigation the SFO . .
Cited – Axon, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Another Admn 23-Jan-2006
A mother sought to challenge guidelines issued by the respondent which would allow doctors to protect the confidentiality of women under 16 who came to them for assistance even though the sexual activities they might engage in would be unlawful.
Applied – General Dental Council v Savery and Others Admn 16-Nov-2011
Complaints had been made against certain dentists. Their patients object that they had not been asked about disclosure of their medical records to the tribunals hearing the fitness to practice cases.
Held: The GDC was under no obligation to . .
Cited – Re C (A Child) FC 29-Sep-2015
There had been care proceedings as to C. The mother was treated by a psychiatrist, X, and an associate Y. They also prepared expert reports. M formally complained about X, and the charges having been dismissed, the doctors now sought disclosure of . .
Cited – The Christian Institute and Others v The Lord Advocate SC 28-Jul-2016
(Scotland) By the 2014 Act, the Scottish Parliament had provided that each child should have a named person to monitor that child’s needs, with information about him or her shared as necessary. The Institute objected that the imposed obligation to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Health Professions

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165528

Rasool v General Pharmaceutical Council: Admn 6 Feb 2015

R challenged the decision of a Fitness to Practice Committee to remove his name from the Register pursuant to Article 54(2)(c) of the 2010 Order, after a five day hearing before the Committee. The appeal is brought pursuant to Article 58(1)(a) of the Order.
The disciplinary proceedings against R arose out of an undercover investigation by the BBC into the allegedly unlawful supply of prescription only medicines by a number of pharmacies in central London.

Judges:

Carr DBE

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 217 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Medicines Act 1968, Pharmacy Order 2010

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health Professions

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.542310

Dr (Mrs) U A Uruakpa v Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons: EAT 18 Jun 2001

The applicant appealed an order striking out her complaint of race discrimination as hopeless. She sought recognition as a veterinary surgeon. Her claim had been dismissed because, under the section the College exercised a statutory power. She asserted that the regulations gave a wide discretion to the College to exempt individuals from all or part of the qualification procedures. It was held that the discretion only applied to those who already held one or more of the qualifications which were recognised. She claimed also that the tribunal system denied her the possibility of equality of arms, and therefore a fair hearing under art 6. The EAT held that the tribunal system was designed to be informal, and Chairmen are specifically required to give assistance to lay parties. There was no breach of that right.
EAT Human Rights –

Judges:

His Honour Judge J Altman

Citations:

EAT/1074/98

Statutes:

Veterinary Surgeon (Examination of Commonwealth and Foreign Candidates) Regulations 1967 Sch para 5, Race Relations Act 1976 41

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Human Rights, Discrimination, Health Professions, Employment

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.168224

Garofalo and others v Ministero della Sanita and USL no 58 di Palermo: ECJ 16 Oct 1997

ECJ Article 177 of the EC Treaty – Jurisdiction – Court of one of the Member States – Extraordinary petition to the President of the Italian Republic – Compulsory opinion of the Consiglio di Stato – Directives 86/457/EEC and 93/16/EEC – Specific training in general medical practice – Rights acquired before 1 January 1995

Citations:

C-69/96, [1997] EUECJ C-69/96

Links:

Bailii

European, Health Professions

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161802

Regina (Singapore Medical Council) v General Medical Council: Admn 21 Dec 2006

The Singapore Medical Council (SMC) sought judicial review of the decision by the respondent to discontinue disciplinary proceedings against a doctor. The SMC had investigated complaints of professional misconduct against the British registered practitioner, and had supplied supporting information to the GMC. They complained that they had not been notified so as to be allowed to make representations before the decision had been made.
Held: In making such a decision, the council had no duty of care to a foreign based disciplinary committee. Because of the date of the complaint, the proceedings were under the 1988 Regulations, not the new ones. Under those rules the SMC were not as such a complainant who was required or entitled to be consulted.

Judges:

David J

Citations:

Times 12-Jan-2007, [2006] EWHC 3277 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

General Medical Council Preliminary Proceedings Committee and Professional Conduct Committee (Procedure) Rules Order of Council (SI 1988 No 2255)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health Professions

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.247965

Vlassopoulou v Ministerium fur Justiz, Bundes- u Europaangelegenheiten Baden-Wurttemberg: ECJ 7 May 1991

The authorities of a Member State when considering a request by a national of another Member State for authorisation to exercise a regulated profession, must take into consideration the professional qualification of the person concerned by making a comparison between the qualifications certified by his diplomas, certificates and other formal qualifications and the professional qualifications required by the national rules for the exercise of the profession in question.

Citations:

C-340/89, [1991] ECR I-2357, [1991] EUECJ C-340/89

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Dr A Lambiris v The Specialist Training Authority of the Medical Royal Colleges and the General Medical Council, the Secretary of State for Health – Interested Parties CA 8-May-2003
The applicant challenged the failure to register him properly to reflect his specialism for which he had been qualified in Greece.
Held: The Directive set out principles for the recognition of medical qualifications within the Union. The Order . .
Cited – Dr A Lambiris v The Specialist Training Authority of the Medical Royal Colleges and the General Medical Council, the Secretary of State for Health – Interested Parties CA 8-May-2003
The applicant challenged the failure to register him properly to reflect his specialism for which he had been qualified in Greece.
Held: The Directive set out principles for the recognition of medical qualifications within the Union. The Order . .
Cited – Gebhard v Consiglio dell’Ordine degli Avvocati e Procuratori di Milano ECJ 30-Nov-1995
Practice by lawyers in other European jurisdictions were governed by the general principles of freedom of establishment under the Treaty: ‘National measures liable to hinder or make less attractive the exercise of fundamental freedoms guaranteed by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Health Professions

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160365

Nwabueze v General Medical Council: PC 6 Apr 2000

Deliberations of the professional conduct committee hearing a case of professional conduct were in the presence of an assessor who gave advice to the committee. After returning from deliberation the assessor described the advice given, and the chairman announced his decision.
Held: This infringed the right under article 8 of the doctor to a fair trial since he was not allowed to comment on the advice given. Allegations which were irrelevant to the doctor’s practice should be deleted from the charge list presented. As to the lay member’s presence on the Professional Conduct Committee of the General Medical Council, Lord Hope of Craighead said: ‘From this summary it can be seen that Mrs. Walker was and is eminently well qualified to sit on the Professional Conduct Committee as one of its lay members. She brought to that membership an extensive knowledge of the health service in Wales, as a result of having worked there for many years as ~ nurse and midwife and her period of service as director of the South East Wales Institute. It is in the public interest that those who serve as lay members on disciplinary bodies of this kind should be well-informed and have experience of working in the area within which cases are likely to arise on which they may be called upon to adjudicate. It could not possibly be suggested that there was anything in Mrs. Walker’s general background that would be likely to give rise to the danger or possibility of bias on her part when she was considering a case from Wales.’

Judges:

Lord Hope of Craighead

Citations:

Times 11-Apr-2000, [2000] UKPC 16, (Appeal No 21 of 1999), [2000] 1 WLR 1760

Links:

Bailii, PC, PC

Statutes:

Medical Act 1983, European Convention on Human Rights 8

Citing:

Cited – Fox v General Medical Council PC 1960
The appeal by a doctor from the disciplinary committee of the GMC to the board of the Privy Council lies of right by the statute and the terms of statute do not limit or qualify the appeal in any way, so that the appellant is entitled to claim that . .

Cited by:

Cited – Flaherty v National Greyhound Racing Club Ltd CA 14-Sep-2005
The club regulated greyhound racing. The claimant had complained that its disciplinary proceedings had been conducted unfairly. He said that a panel member had an interest as veterinary surgeon in the proceedings at the stadium at which the alleged . .
Cited – The British Medical Association, Regina (on the Application of) v The General Medical Council and Another Admn 4-May-2016
The BMA sought to challenge the validity of the rules governing the procedure of Fitness to Practice panels. In particular the BMA challenged the new absence of a requirement that the panel’s legal advice and assistance be available to the parties. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions, Human Rights, Natural Justice

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159404

Dr Gnanapragasam Anton Joseph Selvanathan v The General Medical Council: PC 11 Oct 2000

Decisions of the Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC should now be accompanied by explanations. Earlier practice of issuing a bare decision had been superseded by general practice in decision making bodies, and also by detailed rules governing the practice of the committee. Fairness required reasons to be given so that the disciplined doctor could make an informed decision on whether to appeal.

Citations:

Times 26-Oct-2000, (Appeal No 21 of 2000, [2000] UKPC 37

Links:

Bailii, PC, PC

Statutes:

General Medical Council Preliminary Proceedings and Professional Conduct Committee (Procedure) Rules 1988 Order in Council 1988/2255, Medical Act 1983

Administrative, Health Professions

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159426

Dr Manjula Krippendorf v The General Medical Council: PC 24 Nov 2000

(Reasons for report) When the Committee of Professional Performance was considering the standard of professional practice of a doctor, the committee should consider his actual record of practice as disclosed from the records of his practice, and should not judge the doctor against hypothetical performance in hypothetical cases. Their duties were not akin to an examination of a student. The committee had wrongly assessed the doctor on situations which had not occurred in her practice and she asserted that the tests had been on an area in which she was not practicing at the time.

Citations:

Times 29-Nov-2000, [2000] UKPC 45, [2001] 1 WLR 1054

Links:

Bailii, PC, PC

Cited by:

Cited – Dr Qureshi v The General Medical Council PC 14-Jul-2003
PC (The Committee on Professional Performance of the GMC) A complaint had been made against the doctor with regard to certain areas of his practice. The committee had ordered him to undergo assessments also of . .
Cited – Sadler v The General Medical Council PC 15-Jul-2003
(The Committee on Professional Performance of the GMC) The distinction drawn in Krippendorf between a practitioner’s current competence and past performance was not to be taken too far. The purpose of the assessment was not to punish the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159433

Dr Marta Stefan v The General Medical Council: PC 8 Mar 1999

The General Medical Council is under a duty to give reasons for its decisions however short. Though no express duty is in the regulations under which it operates, the availability of an appeal on a point of law, implied the need to give reasons.

Citations:

Times 11-Mar-1999, (Appeal No 16 of 1998), [1999] UKPC 10

Links:

Bailii, PC, PC, PC

Statutes:

Medical Act 1983

Natural Justice, Health Professions

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159342

Roylance v The General Medical Council (No 2): PC 24 Mar 1999

(Medical Act 1983) Dr Roylance was the chief executive of a hospital in which there had been excessive mortality rates of children who underwent cardiac surgery and had failed to take steps to deal with the problem.
Held: A doctor who carried out purely administrative functions within a hospital still had a doctor’s duties and was not entitled to disregard his medical responsibility. The Court would not enquire into private deliberations of judicial panel. Misconduct involved acts or omissions which fell short of what was proper in the circumstances and that the standard of propriety might often be found by reference to the rules and standards normally required to be followed. It must be serious and must be linked to the profession of medicine. He pointed out that conduct removed from the practice of medicine might qualify if it was of a sufficiently immoral or outrageous or disgraceful character. This was because the public reputation of and public confidence in the profession could be adversely affected.

Judges:

Lord Clyde

Citations:

Times 26-Mar-1999, [1999] UKPC 16, Appeal No 49 of 1998, [1999] Lloyd’s Rep Med 139, [2000] 1 AC 311

Links:

Bailii, PC, PC, PC

Statutes:

Medical Act 1983

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Dr Silver v The General Medical Council PC 14-Apr-2003
(General Medical Council) The appellant appealed a finding of serious professional misconduct and his suspension from the medical register for twelve months. Over a nine day period despite prompts from the son, a daughter and two other health care . .
Cited – Meadow v General Medical Council Admn 17-Feb-2006
The appellant challenged being struck off the medical register. He had given expert evidence in a criminal case which was found misleading and to have contributed to a wrongful conviction for murder.
Held: The evidence though mistaken was . .
Cited – Harford v The Nursing and Midwifery Council Admn 10-Apr-2013
The appellant challenged a finding that her fitness to practice had been impaired by misconduct and the attachment of a conditions of practice order effective for six months.
Held: The Panel had applied the correct test. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159348

Dr John Roylance v The General Medical Council Oral judgment upon petition: PC 19 Jan 1999

(Medical Act 1983) Discussions in camera by the professional conduct committee of the General Medical Council attracted public interest immunity and were not disclosable to the party before the council.

Judges:

Lord Clyde

Citations:

Times 27-Jan-1999, [1999] UKPC 3, [2000] 1 AC 311

Links:

Bailii, PC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Connor and another; Regina v Mirza HL 22-Jan-2004
Extension of Inquiries into Jury Room Activities
The defendants sought an enquiry as to events in the jury rooms on their trials. They said that the secrecy of a jury’s deliberations did not fit the human right to a fair trial. In one case, it was said that jurors believed that the defendant’s use . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159333

Trivedi v the General Medical Council: PC 18 Nov 1996

(Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC)

Citations:

[1996] UKPC 41

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

See Also – Regina v General Medical Council ex parte Dr K S Trivedi CA 3-Mar-1996
. .
See Also – Regina v South Humberside Health Authority ex parte Trivedi Admn 17-Apr-1997
. .
See Also – Trivedi v Royal Hull Hospitals NHS Trust EAT 11-Nov-1996
. .
See Also – Trivedi, Regina (on the Application Of) v General Medical Council CA 14-Nov-1996
. .
See Also – Regina v Northern and Yorkshire RHA, ex parte Trivedi 1995
The court discussed the scope of the disciplinary process undertaken by the respondent: ‘The fact that the process is investigative and inquisitorial rather than a form of litigation between the parties . . does not mean that the medical service . .

Cited by:

See Also – Regina v General Medical Council ex parte Dr K S Trivedi CA 3-Mar-1996
. .
See Also – Trivedi v Royal Hull Hospitals NHS Trust EAT 11-Nov-1996
. .
See Also – Trivedi, Regina (on the Application Of) v General Medical Council CA 14-Nov-1996
. .
See Also – Regina v Secretary of State for Health and Family Health Service Appeal Unit ex parte Trivedi CA 13-Dec-1996
. .
See Also – Regina v South Humberside Health Authority ex parte Trivedi Admn 17-Apr-1997
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159202

Singh v The General Medical Council: PC 9 Jul 1996

Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC – Appeal by a general practitioner against a determination of the Professional Conduct Committee of the General Medical Council that he was guilty of serious professional misconduct.

Judges:

Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Hoffmann

Citations:

[1996] UKPC 26

Links:

Bailii

Health Professions

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159185

Libman v The General Medical Council: PC 20 Oct 1971

PC (General Medical Council) The appellant a consultant physician appealed against a finding of serious professional misconduct. He had had sexual relations with a patient, and offered to pay a sum for her silence. The Board was aksed to consider its jurisdiction in appeals from the disciplinary committee of the GMC.
Held: The Board set out four general general propositions supporting their decision to reject the appeal. Lord Hailsham: ‘(1) The appeal lies of right by the statute and the terms of statute do not limit or qualify the appeal in any way, so that the appellant is entitled to claim that it is in a general sense nothing less than a rehearing of his case and a review of the decision. See Per Lord Radcliffe in Fox v General Medical Council ([1960] 3 All ER at 226, [1960] 1 WLR at 1020).
(2) Notwithstanding the generality of the above language, the actual exercise of the jurisdiction is severely limited by the circumstances in which it can be invoked. The appeal is not by way of re-hearing in the sense that the witnesses are heard afresh or the evidence gone over again (see per Lord Radcliffe). This, amongst other things, means that there is a heavy burden on an appellant who wishes to displace a verdict on the grounds that the evidence alone makes the decision unsatisfactory.
(3) Beyond a bare statement of its findings of fact, the disciplinary committee does not in general give reasons for its decision as in the case of a trial in the High Court by judge alone from which an appeal by way of rehearing lies to the Court of Appeal (see per Lord Radcliffe ([1960] 3 All ER at 227, 229, [1960] 1 WLR at 1021, 1023)). It follows from this that the only circumstances in which an appellate court can reverse a view of the facts taken by the disciplinary committee would be a case where, on examination, it would appear that the committee had misread the evidence to such an extent that they were not entitled to make a finding in the state of the evidence presented before them.
(4) The legal assessor who assists the committee at its hearing is not a judge, and his advice to the committee is not a summing up, and no analogy with a criminal appeal against a conviction before a judge and jury can properly be drawn. The legal assessor simply advises the committee in camera on points of law and reports his advice in open court after he has given it. The committee under its president are masters both of law and of the facts and what might amount to misdirection in law by a judge to a jury at a criminal trial does not necessarily invalidate the committee’s decision. Where a criticism is made of the legal adviser’s account of his advice the question is whether it can fairly be thought to have been of sufficient significance to the result to invalidate the decision. See Fox v General Medical Council and per Lord Guest in Sivarajah v General Medical Council ([1964] 1 All ER at 507, [1964] 1 WLR at 116, 117).’

Judges:

Lord Hailsham

Citations:

[1971] UKPC 1, [1971] UKPC 33, [1972] AC 217

Links:

Bailii, PC, Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Fox v General Medical Council PC 1960
The appeal by a doctor from the disciplinary committee of the GMC to the board of the Privy Council lies of right by the statute and the terms of statute do not limit or qualify the appeal in any way, so that the appellant is entitled to claim that . .
Cited – Bhattacharya v General Medical Council PC 1967
The Board rejected an argument that the disciplinary committee of the GMC were wrong in principle to find the appellant guilty of infamous conduct in a professional respect where he contended that the doctor’s intimate relationship began before the . .
Cited – Sivarajah v General Medical Council PC 1964
The board considered the duty of the legal advisor to the disciplinary committee of the General Medical Council: ‘The legal assessor is, however, in no sense in the position of a judge summing up to a jury, nor is the committee’s function analogous . .
Cited – Felix v General Dental Council PC 1960
A restricted meaning should be given to the phrase ‘infamous conduct in a professional respect’ by adding the qualifier that the conduct must be of such a kind as is ‘deserving the strongest reprobation’ and ‘so heinous as to merit . . the extreme . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.159147

Dr Mohammed Saeed v Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust: CA 20 Dec 2000

Where disciplinary proceedings were contemplated against an employee who might be subject to alternative contractual and professional complaints procedures, the employer must look to the contract to decide which procedure was to be followed. If the disciplinary procedure followed was a contractual one, then public law considerations of reasonableness would not apply to the proceedings. A doctor who, in the course of examining a patient’s finger, touched her breasts and tummy, could properly face a complaint under his contract as personal misconduct rather than as a professional conduct complaint. The employer has to decide which procedure to follow. But the employer has to take that decision in accordance with the terms of the contract.
Hale LJ said: ‘One might have thought that the answer to the first issue was obvious. The employer who is contemplating disciplinary action against an employee has to decide which procedure should be followed. If the employee thinks that the employer has made the wrong choice, he can try to have it changed in advance or seek damages after the event. The court will have to perform its usual task of construing the contract and applying it to the facts of the case.’

Judges:

Keene LJ, Hale LJ

Citations:

Times 17-Jan-2001, [2000] EWCA Civ 342, [2001] ICR 903, [2000] Lloyd’s Rep Med 331

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Saeed v Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust 2000
. .

Cited by:

Followed – Skidmore v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust CA 15-Jan-2002
The appellant was a doctor accused of lying to a patient about the details of an operation. He appealed a decision dismissing him.
Held: Such an allegation was an allegation of professional misconduct, and should have been dealt with as such, . .
Approved – Skidmore v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust HL 22-May-2003
The disciplinary code for doctors employed by the NHS provides different procedures cases involving allegations of ‘professional conduct’ or ‘personal conduct.’ The first would involve a more judicial process, and the second a more informal . .
Cited – Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust QBD 31-Jul-2009
The claimant, a consultant surgeon had been subject to disciplinary proceedings by his employer. They were however conducted in a manner which breached his contract. The GMC had summarily dismissed the same allegations. The claimant now appealed . .
Cited – Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust SC 14-Dec-2011
The claimant had been employed as consultant surgeon. He had been dismissed in a manner inconsistent with the extress terms of his employment contract. He sought common law damages for the manner of his dismissal. The employer appealed.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Health Professions

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147375

T, Regina (on The Application of) v Ministry of Justice: Admn 9 Oct 2018

The Claimant brought his application for judicial review, seeking a declaration under s.4(2) of the 1998 Act that s.2(1) of the 1961 Act, which maintained the previous position at common law and makes assisting suicide a criminal offence, is incompatible with the rights of the Claimant under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights, as a matter of domestic law.
Held: The application failed (before the judgment, the Court heard that the claimant had taken his own life in Switzerland).

Judges:

Irwin LJ, Phillips J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 2615 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1998 4(2), Suicide Act 1961

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Human Rights, Crime, Health Professions

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.625913

Watson v General Medical Council: Admn 26 Aug 2005

The claimant said that the procedure of the fitness to practice panel was unfair in that representations had been accepted by the panel from an expert witness without him having an opportunity to challenge or comment on that evidence.
Held: Any advice accepted by the tribunal must allow for submissions from the parties. The appeal was by way of a re-hearing. Since the assessor gave evidence as to the facts from which no appeal lay, it was particularly important that his advice should be subject to appropriate submissions.

Judges:

Stanley Burnton J

Citations:

Times 07-Oct-2005, [2005] EWHC 1896 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Medical Act 1983 840

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Clark (Procurator Fiscal, Kirkcaldy) v Kelly PC 11-Feb-2003
PC (The High Court of Justiciary) The minuter challenged the role of the legal adviser to the district courts in Scotland, and as to his independence.
Held: The legal adviser was not subject to the same . .
Cited – Regina (Arley Erlester Clark) v United Kingdom Central Council for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting 2004
The court described the function of the appellate court when deciding whether the decision of a disciplinary committee was challenged: ‘In broad terms, the approach of the court on an appeal is as follows. Although its function in respect of a . .
Cited – Threlfall v General Optical Council Admn 26-Nov-2004
The optician, a registered opthalmic optician appealed a finding of serious professional misconduct in having failed to diagnose a patient’s condition when referring her to the hospital.
Held: The appeal succeeded. An optician carrying out an . .
Cited – Moody v General Osteopathic Council Admn 5-Apr-2004
. .
Cited – Regina on the Application of Mahfouz v The Professional Conduct Committee of the General Medical Council CA 5-Mar-2004
The doctor requested members of the disciplinary tribunal to recuse themselves when, after the first day of the hearing they saw prejudicial material in newspapers which material was not in evidence. They had further declined to allow an adjournment . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions, Natural Justice

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.229752

Kent v Dr Griffiths, Dr Roberts, London Ambulance Service: CA 11 Dec 1998

Though there is no duty at large to help someone in need of urgent assistance, an ambulance service, by accepting a 999 call, may have accepted a duty to the caller. It remained open to argue as to whether it was fair just and reasonable to impose duty.

Citations:

Times 23-Dec-1998, Gazette 27-Jan-1999, [1998] EWCA Civ 1941

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Kent v Doctor Griffiths, Doctor Roberts, The London Ambulance Service QBD 16-Jul-1999
The claimant suffered a respiratory arrest after an emergency ambulance called by the first defendant, did not arrive for 40 minutes.
Held: the ambulance service was negligenct and liable. The acceptance of the doctor’s request for an . .

Cited by:

See Also – Kent v Doctor Griffiths, Doctor Roberts, The London Ambulance Service QBD 16-Jul-1999
The claimant suffered a respiratory arrest after an emergency ambulance called by the first defendant, did not arrive for 40 minutes.
Held: the ambulance service was negligenct and liable. The acceptance of the doctor’s request for an . .
See Also – Kent v Griffiths and others CA 3-Feb-2000
A doctor attended the home of a patient suffering from an asthma attack and called for an ambulance to take her immediately to hospital. The control replied ‘Okay doctor.’ After 13 minutes the ambulance had not arrived and the patient’s husband made . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Health Professions

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.145420

Regina v Family Health Services Appeal Authority Interested Party ex parte Elmfield Drugs Ltd: CA 23 Jul 1998

A doctor could delegate the task of supply of medicines to patients even though the staff member was neither doctor nor pharmacist. A mere handing over of medicines after prescription set did not involve discretion

Citations:

Times 16-Sep-1998, Gazette 16-Sep-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 1278

Statutes:

Medicines Act 1968

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health Professions

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.144757

Regina v Secretary of State for Health, Ex parte Guirguis: CA 1990

The secretary of state did not have jurisdiction to intervene in disciplinary proceedings to say whether a doctor had properly been dismissed where the allegation was of personal rather than professional misconduct.

Citations:

[1990] IRLR 30

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Skidmore v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust HL 22-May-2003
The disciplinary code for doctors employed by the NHS provides different procedures cases involving allegations of ‘professional conduct’ or ‘personal conduct.’ The first would involve a more judicial process, and the second a more informal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Health Professions

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.182499

Rovenska v General Medical Council: CA 4 Dec 1996

A Czechoslovakian doctor complained against the General Medical Council under Section 12(1)(a) of the 1976 Act 1976 in respect of the most recent of a series of refusals, under its rules for the grant of limited registration as a medical practitioner in this country for doctors with overseas qualifications, to exempt her from its requirement of passing a test of proficiency in English.
Held: The appeal failed. The GMC’s rules when being tested as discriminatory gave a new complaint on each occasion on which they were used. The most recent refusal, which was in response to a letter on the complainant’s behalf from a local Council for Racial Equality, was within time.
Brooke LJ acknowledged that a complainant of discrimination in the field of employment may establish jurisdiction by relying simply on the existence of a policy as a continuing act of discrimination regardless of its most recent application to him: ‘It was an important part of . . [the GMC’s] case that the Employment Appeal Tribunal failed to take into account the fact that the cases on which it relied were all decided in relation to s. 4 of the 1976 Act or s.6 of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975. . . In those cases the discriminatory act complained of is not a one-off act of refusal; it arises out of the way in which the employer affords his or her employees access to opportunities for promotion, transfer or training, or to any other benefits, facilities or services, or out of the employer refusing or deliberately omitting to afford the employees access to them. In these circumstances, the courts have held that if an employer adopts a policy which means that a black employee or female employee is inevitably barred from access to valuable benefits, this is a continuing act of discrimination against employers who fall into these categories until the offending policy is abrogated.’ and
‘In my judgment, it is not necessary to resolve the question of the proper interpretation of s. 12(1)(a) of the Act in the present case. If the regime which the GMC had selected for its exemptions policy was inherently discriminatory . . then on every occasion that it refused to allow her limited registration without first taking the . . test it would be committing an act of unlawful discrimination contrary to s. 12(1)(b) of the Act. I do not regard the letter from the Greenwich Racial Equality Council as being akin to a solicitor’s letter in these circumstances. It was inviting the GMC to grant Dr Rovenska an exemption, and there were three new features of this application compared with the letter Dr Rovenska had written in December. It advanced a new (bad) argument based on her acquisition of the new Master’s degree; it forwarded a new up-to-date reference; and it expressly asked for an exemption. The GMC refused this application, and Dr Rovenska’s application was made within three months of that refusal.’

Judges:

Brooke LJ, Nourse, Roch LJJ

Citations:

Times 31-Dec-1996, [1996] EWCA Civ 1096, [1997] IRLR 367, [1998] ICR 85

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Race Relations Act 1976 68

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Rovenska v General Medical Council EAT 22-Sep-1994
The complainant said that the respondent’s rules imposing language skills testing on doctors with recognised foreign qualifications were discriminatory.
Held: Discriminatory rules are a continuing act and the complaint was not barred by time . .

Cited by:

Cited – Cast v Croydon College CA 19-Mar-1998
Complaint was made within time limit when the decision complained of was a reconsideration of an earlier decision, not just a reference back to it.
Held: In a sex discrimination case, where there has been a constructive dismissal, time runs . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Health Professions

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.140963

Regina v Manchester Health Authority ex parte Balamoody: Admn 21 Apr 1999

The applicant sought leave to bring judicial review. In seeking to extend his nursing home he said that the respondent had allowed him to execute works to allow 38 patients, but had then only registered the home for 16 patients.
Held: The decision complained off had been some seven years earlier, and he was required to bring his claim promptly and in any event within three months. The explanation for the delay was unsatisfactory, and the claim was rejected.

Judges:

Harrison J

Citations:

[1999] EWHC Admin 328

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

See Also – Balamoody v Manchester Health Authority EAT 2-Mar-1999
The claimant appealed against orders striking out his complaint of unlawful racial discrimination. He had owned a nursing home regulated by the respondent authority. A senior white employee had broken regulations regarding safekeeping of drugs, but . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Health Professions

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.139592

Regina v Family Health Services Appeal Authority ex parte E Moss Limited: Admn 29 Apr 1998

Citations:

[1998] EWHC Admin 463

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Family Health Services Appeal Authority, Boots Chemist Interested Party and similar CA 11-Mar-1999
In the context of an application for a pharmacy licence, questions of adequacy, need and desirability are to be decided by the decision-makers, and provided that the proper approach is adopted, the answer will inevitably become a question of fact . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions

Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.138584