Category: Health Professions

Kent v Griffiths and Others (No 2): CA 10 Feb 2000

An ambulance service could be liable in negligence in respect of its response to an emergency call-out where for no good reason there was an unreasonable delay in responding, and the servivice had accepted the call. The ambulance service was distinguishable from the fire and police services. They owed a duty over and above the need not to add to the claimant’s suffering. There could be no rational reason for not responding. There was a duty of care, and the delay added to the injury. Taking an example of a police officer the example of a police officer helping a pedestrian across the road: ‘If the policeman assumes this task there is no reason of policy or proximity why he should be in any different position from a school teacher who performs this task and, if this is appropriate on the facts, is liable for negligence.’
Lord Woolf MR Aldous and Laws LJJ
Times 10-Feb-2000, Gazette 17-Feb-2000, [2000] 2 All ER 474, [2001] 1 QB 36, [2000] EWCA Civ 25
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – 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:
Cited – Mullaney v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police CA 15-May-2001
The claimant police officer was severely injured making an arrest. He claimed damages from the respondent for contributory negligence of other officers in failing to come to his assistance.
Held: If a police officer owes a duty of care to . .
Cited – Jane Marianne Sandhar, John Stuart Murray v Department of Transport, Environment and the Regions CA 5-Nov-2004
The claimant’s husband died when his car skidded on hoar frost. She claimed the respondent was liable under the Act and at common law for failing to keep it safe.
Held: The respondent had not assumed a general responsibility to all road users . .
Cited – Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust SC 10-Oct-2018
The claimant had been assaulted. He presented at the defendant hospital with head injuries. Despite his complaints he said he was not treated properly, being told to wait five hours at reception, and went home. Later an ambulance was delayed and he . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 September 2021; Ref: scu.82746

Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust: CA 23 Mar 2017

Claimant’s appeal in personal injury litigation based upon alleged negligence by the receptionist in a hospital’s accident and emergency department. The principal issue in the appeal is whether the receptionist (or the health trust acting by the receptionist) owed any tortious duty to provide accurate information to the claimant about waiting times.
Jackson, McCombe, Sales LJJ
[2017] EWCA Civ 151
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust QBD 31-Jul-2015
The claimant sought damages, alleging that the defendant Trust had failed in its treatment of him when he attended Accident and Emergency after being assaulted. The court now considered the issue of liability. The claimant attended with a head . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust SC 10-Oct-2018
The claimant had been assaulted. He presented at the defendant hospital with head injuries. Despite his complaints he said he was not treated properly, being told to wait five hours at reception, and went home. Later an ambulance was delayed and he . .
Cited – Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust SC 10-Oct-2018
The claimant had been assaulted. He presented at the defendant hospital with head injuries. Despite his complaints he said he was not treated properly, being told to wait five hours at reception, and went home. Later an ambulance was delayed and he . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 September 2021; Ref: scu.581069

In re MB (Medical Treatment): CA 26 Mar 1997

The patient was due to deliver a child. A delivery by cesarean section was necessary, but the mother had a great fear of needles, and despite consenting to the operation, refused the necessary consent to anesthesia in any workable form.
Held: The court considered the requirements as to capacity for patients to refuse consent to treatment. A foetus in utero and until birth has no independent legal rights or interests. Butler-Sloss LJ said: ‘Best interests are not limited to medical interests’ and ‘A person lacks capacity if some impairment or disturbance of mental functioning renders the person unable to make a decision whether to consent to or refuse treatment. That inability to make a decision will occur when:
(a) The patient is unable to comprehend and retain the information which is material to the decision, especially as to the likely consequences of having or not having the treatment in question;
(b) The patient is unable to use the information and weigh it in the balance as part of the process of arriving at the decision.’
Did the court have power to compel a woman of competent decision-making power to have a caesarean in order to save her unborn child. The Court rejected the existence of such a power, saying forcibly: ‘The law is, in our judgment, clear that a competent woman who has the capacity to decide may, for religious reasons, other reasons, or for no reasons at all, choose not to have medical intervention, even though, as we have already stated, the consequence may be the death or serious handicap of the child she bears or her own death. She may refuse to consent to the anaesthesia injection in the full knowledge that her decision may significantly reduce the chance of her unborn child being born alive. The foetus up to the moment of birth does not have any separate interests capable of being taken into account when a court has to consider an application for a declaration in respect of a caesarian section operation. The court does not have the jurisdiction to declare that such medical intervention is lawful to protect the interests of the unborn child even at the point of birth.’
Otherwise ‘In Re MB (Caesarian Section)’
Butler-Sloss, Saville, Ward LJJ
Times 18-Apr-1997, [1997] 2 FLR 426, [1997] EWCA Civ 3093, [1997] 8 Med LR 217, [1997] Fam Law 542, [1997] 2 FCR 54, (1997) 38 BMLR 175
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Sidaway v Board of Governors of the Bethlem Royal Hospital and the Maudsley Hospital HL 21-Feb-1985
The plaintiff alleged negligence in the failure by a surgeon to disclose or explain to her the risks inherent in the operation which he had advised.
Held: The appeal failed. A mentally competent patient has an absolute right to refuse to . .
Cited – Re T (An Adult) (Consent to Medical Treatment) CA 1993
The patient who was pregnant had been involved in a car accident and during hospital treatment required a blood transfusion.
Held: Lord Donaldson MR said: ‘Doctors faced with a refusal of consent have to give very careful and detailed . .
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 by:
Cited – Ms B v An NHS Hospital Trust FD 22-Mar-2002
The applicant had come to suffer from a completely disabling condition, and requested that her life support machine be turned off. She did not want to live on a ventilator, and had made a living will. She was found at first to have capacity to make . .
Cited – PS, Regina (on the Application of) v Responsible Medical Officer, Dr G and others Admn 10-Oct-2003
The claimant had been compulsorily detained under the Act. He complained that the detention and compulsory medication infringed his rights, and amongst other things breached his religious beliefs.
Held: This was an exceptional case requiring . .
Cited – Evans v Amicus Healthcare Ltd and others CA 25-Jun-2004
The applicant challenged the decision of the court that the sperm donor who had fertilised her eggs to create embryos stored by the respondent IVF clinic, could withdraw his consent to their continued storage or use.
Held: The judge worked . .
Cited – Regina (Burke) v General Medical Council Admn 30-Jul-2004
The applicant, suffering a life threatening disease, wanted to ensure his continued treatment and revival in the circumstance of losing his own capacity. He said the respondent’s guidelines for doctors were discriminatory and failed to protect his . .
Cited – In Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) CA 22-Sep-2000
Twins were conjoined (Siamese). Medically, both could not survive, and one was dependent upon the vital organs of the other. Doctors applied for permission to separate the twins which would be followed by the inevitable death of one of them. The . .
Distinguished – Sheffield City Council v E; Re E (An Alleged Patient) FD 2-Dec-2004
The council sought an order to prevent E, a patient from contracting a marriage which it considered unwise. As a preliminary issue the parties sought guidance as to the questions to be put to the expert as to capacity.
Held: The woman suffered . .
Cited – E v Channel Four, News International Ltd and St Helens Borough Council FD 1-Jun-2005
The applicant sought an order restraining publication by the defendants of material, saying she did not have capacity to consent to the publication. She suffered a multiple personality disorder. She did herself however clearly wish the film to be . .
Cited – B, Regina (on the Application Of) v SS (Responsible Medical Officer) and others CA 26-Jan-2006
The applicant had been detained after a diagnosis of Bipolar Affective Disorder and convictions for rape. He had applied for discharge, but before the hearing the doctor had said he no longer opposed his release. After the hearing but before being . .
Cited – Masterman-Lister v Brutton and Co, Jewell and Home Counties Dairies (No 1) CA 19-Dec-2002
Capacity for Litigation
The claimant appealed against dismissal of his claims. He had earlier settled a claim for damages, but now sought to re-open it, and to claim in negligence against his former solicitors, saying that he had not had sufficient mental capacity at the . .
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 – McFaddens (A Firm) v Platford TCC 30-Jan-2009
The claimant firm of solicitors had been found negligent, and now sought a contribution to the damages awarded from the barrister defendant. They had not managed properly issues as to their clients competence to handle the proceedings.
Held: . .
Cited – Regina v C HL 30-Jul-2009
Consent to Sex Requires Capacity
The prosecution appealed against the reversal of the defendant’s conviction for a sexual assault of a woman said to be unable to communicate her refusal to sex because of her mental disorder.
Held: The appeal was allowed, and the conviction . .
Cited – N, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health; Regina (E) v Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust CA 24-Jul-2009
The claimants appealed against the imposition on them of smoking bans while they were compulsorily detained at Rampton Hospital. They said that other persons detained for example in prisons had been exempted fully.
Held: The right or freedom . .
Cited – Human Rights Commission for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland : Abortion) SC 7-Jun-2018
The Commission challenged the compatibility of the NI law relating to banning nearly all abortions with Human Rights Law. It now challenged a decision that it did not have standing to bring the case.
Held: (Lady Hale, Lord Kerr and Lord Wilson . .
Cited – Crowter and Others, Regina (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Health And Social Care Admn 23-Sep-2021
Foetus has no Established Human Rights
The Claimants sought a declaration that section 1(1)(d) of the Abortion Act 1967, as amended, is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’), as well as some other remedies. The claimant had Down’s Syndrome, and complained the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 September 2021; Ref: scu.141757

Dr Hall v The General Medical Council: PC 7 Nov 2001

(The Health Committee of the GMC) The appellant challenged a decision of the respondent extending his suspension from the register for a further twelve months. He had been suspended against a finding that he did not have an appropriate insight into the problems with his practice. Subsequent reports indicated that he had not acquired insight. The committee had judged the fitness to practise of the practitioner to be seriously impaired by reason of his physical or mental condition. They had medical reports suggesting he still suffered bipolar affective disorder, though it may be in remission.
Held: The continued suspension was correct.
Lord Hope of Craighead Sir Anthony Evans Sir Philip Otton
Appeal No 25 of 2001
PC, PC
General Medical Council Health Committee (Procedure) Rules 1987 Order of Council 1987-97 Rule 24, Medical Act 1983 37 40
England and Wales

Updated: 14 September 2021; Ref: scu.166869

Borges v The General Medical Council: PC 31 Aug 2001

(Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC) The appellant was a gynaecologist. His name had been removed from the register after findings of serious professional misconduct in relation to inappropriate sexual touching during examinations. Separately, the two allegations may have been less serious, but together, they showed a readiness to exploit female patients for some form of sexual adventurism. Appeal dismissed.
Lord Hoffmann, Lord Cooke of Thorndon, Sir Andrew Leggatt, Lord Cooke of Thorndon
Appeal No 71 of 2000
PC, PC
England and Wales

Updated: 06 September 2021; Ref: scu.166562

Lambert And Others v France: ECHR 5 Jun 2015

The applicants alleged, in particular, that the withdrawal of Vincent Lambert’s artificial nutrition and hydration would be in breach of the State’s obligations under Article 2 of the Convention, would constitute ill-treatment amounting to torture within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention and would infringe his physical integrity, in breach of Article 8 of the Convention.
Dean Spielmann, P
46043/14 – Grand Chamber Judgment, [2015] ECHR 545
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 2 3
Human Rights
Cited by:
Cited – N v ACCG and Others SC 22-Mar-2017
The local authority and a young man’s parents disputed his continued care, he having substantial incapacities. The parents wanted assistance caring for him on visits home. The LA declined to fund that support. The LA now argued that the CoP had not . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 September 2021; Ref: scu.547596

F v West Berkshire Health Authority: HL 17 Jul 1990

The parties considered the propriety of a sterilisation of a woman who was, through mental incapacity, unable to give her consent.
Held: The appeal succeeded, and the operation would be lawful if the doctor considered it to be in the best interests of the patient. At common law a doctor cannot lawfully operate on adult patients of sound mind, or give them any other treatment involving the application of physical force however small (‘other treatment’), without their consent. ‘[A]ny touching of another’s body is, in the absence of lawful excuse, capable of amounting to a battery and a trespass’, but it is an essential element of the tort of battery that the application of force is without lawful excuse. The defence of necessity meant that it was lawful for such professionals and other carers to do what was in the best interests of a person who lacked the capacity to decide for himself whether it should be done.
The High Court has an inherent jurisdiction to make declarations in advance that a particular course of action would, or would not, be lawful in accordance with that principle
Orse : F (Mental Patient: Sterilisation), In re
Lord Bridge of Harwich, Lord Brandon of Oakbrook, Lord Griffiths, Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle
[1990] 2 AC 1, [1991] UKHL 1
Bailii
Mental Health Act 1983
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – In re B (A Minor) (Wardship: Sterilisation) HL 1987
Paramount Consideration in Wardship Application
The House considered a case involving the sterilisation of a girl just under 18, who suffered from mental disability.
Held: A court exercising wardship jurisdiction, when reaching a decision on an application to authorise an operation for . .
Cited – Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee QBD 1957
Professional to use Skilled Persons Ordinary Care
Negligence was alleged against a doctor.
Held: McNair J directed the jury: ‘Where some special skill is exercised, the test for negligence is not the test of the man on the Clapham omnibus, because he has not got this special skill. The test . .
Appeal from – F v West Berkshire Health Authority CA 3-Feb-1989
An application was made for a declaration that a proposed sterilisation of an adult woman who could not give consent would be lawful.
Held: It would not.
Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR: ‘Just as the law and the courts rightly pay great, . .
Cited – Cole v Turner 1704
For a touching of another’s person to amount to a battery, it had to be a touching ‘in anger’. . .
Cited – Regina v Coney QBD 18-Mar-1882
A public prize-fight was unlawful. Spectators were tried at Berkshire County Quarter Sessions with common assault. The Chairman of Quarter Sessions directed the jury to convict the spectators of common assault on the basis that having stayed to . .
Cited – Australasian Steam Navigation Co v Morse PC 1872
Sir Montague Smith: ‘when by the force of circumstances a man has the duty cast upon him of taking some action for another, and under that obligation, adopts the course which, to the judgment of a wise and prudent man, is apparently the best for the . .
Cited – Schloendorff v Society of New York Hospital 1913
(USA) The libertarian principle of self-determination allows that ‘Every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body, and a surgeon who performs an operation without the patient’s consent . .
Cited – Guaranty Trust Co of New York v Hannay and Co CA 1915
A claimant does not need to have a subsisting cause of action against a defendant before the court will grant a claimant a declaration. The court considered the ambiguity in the meaning of the word ‘jurisdiction’: ‘The first and, in my opinion, the . .
Cited – Russian Commercial and Industrial Bank v British Bank of Foreign Trade HL 1921
The court considered how the court should exercise any jurisdiction to make declarations.
Held: The House (Lord Dunedin) referred, with approval, to the approach taken by the Scottish Courts, identifying three propositions, namely that the . .
Cited – Prager v Blatspiel, Stamp and Heacock Ltd 1924
McCardie J spoke of the demand of an expanding society for an expanding common law. An agent must act bona fide in the interests of his principal. . .
Cited – Wilson v Pringle CA 26-Mar-1986
Two boys played in a school yard. D said he had pulled a bag from the other’s shoulder as an ordinary act of horseplay. The plaintiff said it was a battery.
Held: The defendant’s appeal against summary judgment was allowed. A claim of trespass . .
Cited – Sidaway v Board of Governors of the Bethlem Royal Hospital and the Maudsley Hospital HL 21-Feb-1985
The plaintiff alleged negligence in the failure by a surgeon to disclose or explain to her the risks inherent in the operation which he had advised.
Held: The appeal failed. A mentally competent patient has an absolute right to refuse to . .
Cited – Rex v Donovan CCA 1934
The defendant was convicted of indecent assault and common assault after caning a 17 year old female complainant for the purposes of sexual gratification. The complainant suffered actual bodily harm, though the defendant was not charged with an . .
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 – Vine v National Dock Labour Board HL 1957
The plaintiff was employed under a statutory scheme for the employment of dock labourers. He appealed against a finding that the rules on dismissal contained within the scheme were not the only ones appertaining.
Held: (reversing the majority . .
Cited – S v McC; W v W HL 1972
The distinction between the court’s ‘custodial’ and ‘protective’ jurisdictions was recognised. The case concerned the ordering of blood tests with a view to determining the paternity of a child involved in divorce proceedings. This was not a matter . .
Cited – Attorney-General’s Reference (No 6 of 1980) CACD 1981
The court considered a reference on a point of law as to whether consent could be a defence to a charge of assault arising out of a fight in a public place to which the other party consented.
Held: Lord Lane CJ said: ‘It is not in the public . .
Cited – In re D (A Minor) (Wardship: Sterilisation) 1976
. .

Cited by:
Cited – Bici and Bici v Ministry of Defence QBD 7-Apr-2004
Claimants sought damages for personal injuries incurred when, in Pristina, Kosovo and during a riot, British soldiers on a UN peacekeeping expedition fired on a car.
Held: The incidents occurred in the course of peace-keeping duties. It was . .
Cited – Ashley and Another v Sussex Police CA 27-Jul-2006
The deceased was shot by police officers raiding his flat in 1998. The claimants sought damages for his estate. They had succeeded in claiming damages for false imprisonment, but now appealed dismissal of their claim for damages for assault and . .
Cited – N v ACCG and Others SC 22-Mar-2017
The local authority and a young man’s parents disputed his continued care, he having substantial incapacities. The parents wanted assistance caring for him on visits home. The LA declined to fund that support. The LA now argued that the CoP had not . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 September 2021; Ref: scu.198139

An NHS Trust and Others v Y and Another: SC 30 Jul 2018

The court was asked whether a court order must always be obtained before clinically assisted nutrition and hydration, which is keeping alive a person with a prolonged disorder of consciousness, can be withdrawn, or whether, in some circumstances, this can occur without court involvement. The Official Solicitor appealed from the grant of a declaration.
Held: The appeal failed. It was not established law that a court’s permission was required. The question facing anyone considering treatment of a patient not able to make his or her own decision is not whether it is lawful to withdraw treatment, but rather the legality of giving it. Treatment is lawful only if it is in the patient’s best interests. A doctor carrying out treatment in the reasonable belief that it will be in the patient’s best interests, is entitled to the protection from liability conferred by section 5 of the 2005 Act. Airedale v Bland did not impose such a requirement. Where the situation was not clear than a court application was appropriate.
Lady Hale, President, Lord Mance, Lord Wilson, Lord Hodge, Lady Black
[2018] UKSC 46, (2018) 21 CCL Rep 410, [2019] AC 978, (2018) 163 BMLR 1, [2018] WLR(D) 490, [2018] 3 WLR 751, UKSC 2017/0202
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 2018 Feb 26 am Video, SC 2018 Feb 26 pm Video, SC 2018 Feb 27 am Video
Mental Capacity Act 2005 42(1), European Convention on Human Rights
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – NHS Trust v Y and Another QBD 13-Nov-2017
Claim for a declaration under CPR Part 8 that it is not mandatory to bring before the Court the withdrawal of Clinically Assisted Nutrition and Hydration (‘CANH’) from a patient who has a prolonged disorder of consciousness in circumstances where . .
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 – Airedale NHS Trust v Bland HL 4-Feb-1993
Procedures on Withdrawal of Life Support Treatment
The patient had been severely injured in the Hillsborough disaster, and had come to be in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). The doctors sought permission to withdraw medical treatment. The Official Solicitor appealed against an order of the Court . .
Cited – Glass v The United Kingdom ECHR 9-Mar-2004
The applicant’s adult son was disabled. There was a disagreement with the hospital about his care. The hospital considered that to alleviate his distress, he should not be resuscitated. The family wanted to take him home, fearing euthanasia. The . .
Cited – Burke, Regina (on the Application of) v General Medical Council and others (Official Solicitor and others intervening) CA 28-Jul-2005
The claimant suffered a congenital degenerative brain condition inevitably resulting in a future need to receive nutrition and hydration by artificial means. He was concerned that a decision might be taken by medical practitioners responsible for . .
Cited – Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v James SC 30-Oct-2013
The hospital where a gravely ill man had been treated had asked for a declaration that it would be in his best interests to withhold certain life-sustaining treatments from him. When can it be in the best interests of a living patient to withhold . .
Cited – Director of Legal Aid Casework and Others v Briggs CA 31-Jul-2017
Orse In re Briggs (Incapacitated Person) . .
Cited – SCC v MSA and Another CoP 20-Sep-2017
Orse In re M (Incapacitated Person: Withdrawal of Treatment)
The court was concerned with the withdrawal of CANH from a woman who was suffering from Huntington’s disease and was in a minimally conscious state. Her family, her clinicians, and a . .
Cited – W v M S and Others CoP 28-Sep-2011
Orse – In re M (Adult Patient) (Minimally Conscious State: Withdrawal of Treatment)
The case concerned a woman in a minimally conscious state, Baker J expressed the view that ‘all decisions about the proposed withholding or withdrawal of ANH . .
Cited – LB (Plastics) Ltd v Swish Products Ltd ChD 1979
Whitford J said: ‘The cases since the Act of 1911 have, however, I think quite plainly established that no originality of thought is needed to sustain a claim to copyright. Under copyright ideas are not protected, only the skill and labour needed to . .
Cited – In re Briggs (Incapacitated Person) 2018
. .

Cited by:
Cited – N v ACCG and Others SC 22-Mar-2017
The local authority and a young man’s parents disputed his continued care, he having substantial incapacities. The parents wanted assistance caring for him on visits home. The LA declined to fund that support. The LA now argued that the CoP had not . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 September 2021; Ref: scu.620170

Burke, Regina (on the Application of) v General Medical Council and others (Official Solicitor and others intervening): CA 28 Jul 2005

The claimant suffered a congenital degenerative brain condition inevitably resulting in a future need to receive nutrition and hydration by artificial means. He was concerned that a decision might be taken by medical practitioners responsible for his care to withdraw that treatment from him when he wished to continue to receive it, regardless of his pain or suffering. The council appealed a declaration which purported to guarantee to the claimant a right to have decided whether he should continue receiving treatment and sustenance beyond any point at which he lost the legal capacity to make his wishes clear.
Held: The declaration was set aside. The judge had been incorrect in interpreting the case of Glass to require resort to judicial authority as a legal requirement to authorise the doctors taking appropriate decisions about treatment. He had gone far beyond the situation before him, and made declarations which purported to be binding on the world. It was vital that the GMC guidelines be taught an implemented properly, and if they were so implemented, the claimant could be re-assured as to his care. There were great dangers in grappling with general issues divorced from a factual content that requires their determination:- ‘The danger is that the court will enunciate propositions of principle without full appreciation of the implications that these will have in practice, throwing into confusion those who feel obliged to attempt to apply those principles in practice.’
Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers, Mr Lord Justice Waller And Lord Justice Wall
[2005] EWCA Civ 1003, Times 02-Aug-2005, [2005] 2 FLR 1223, [2006] QB 273, [2005] 3 WLR 1132
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Regina (Burke) v General Medical Council Admn 30-Jul-2004
The applicant, suffering a life threatening disease, wanted to ensure his continued treatment and revival in the circumstance of losing his own capacity. He said the respondent’s guidelines for doctors were discriminatory and failed to protect his . .
Cited – Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority and Department of Health and Social Security HL 17-Oct-1985
Lawfulness of Contraceptive advice for Girls
The claimant had young daughters. She challenged advice given to doctors by the second respondent allowing them to give contraceptive advice to girls under 16, and the right of the first defendant to act upon that advice. She objected that the . .
Cited – Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee QBD 1957
Professional to use Skilled Persons Ordinary Care
Negligence was alleged against a doctor.
Held: McNair J directed the jury: ‘Where some special skill is exercised, the test for negligence is not the test of the man on the Clapham omnibus, because he has not got this special skill. The test . .
Explained – Glass v The United Kingdom ECHR 9-Mar-2004
The applicant’s adult son was disabled. There was a disagreement with the hospital about his care. The hospital considered that to alleviate his distress, he should not be resuscitated. The family wanted to take him home, fearing euthanasia. The . .
Cited – An NHS Trust v D (Medical Treatment: Consent: Termination) FD 28-Nov-2003
The defendant had been admitted to hospital under the 1983 Act and found to be pregnant. The doctors sought an order permitting an abortion. An order had been made, but the parties invited the court to say whether a court order was required at all. . .
Cited – Airedale NHS Trust v Bland HL 4-Feb-1993
Procedures on Withdrawal of Life Support Treatment
The patient had been severely injured in the Hillsborough disaster, and had come to be in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). The doctors sought permission to withdraw medical treatment. The Official Solicitor appealed against an order of the Court . .
Cited – In re J (a Minor) (Wardship: Medical treatment) CA 1-Oct-1990
J was born at 27 weeks’, weighing only 1.1kg. He suffered very severe and permanent brain damage at the time of his birth, the brain tissue then lost being irreplaceable. He was epileptic and the medical evidence was that he was likely to develop . .
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 by:
Cited – Wyatt and Another v Portsmouth Hospital NHS and Another CA 12-Oct-2005
The appellants’ daughter had been born with very severe disabilities. Her doctors obtained an order allowing them a discretion not to ventilate her to keep her alive if necessary. She had improved, but the family now sought leave to appeal an order . .
Cited – D and D W v Portsmouth Hospital NHS; in re W (A Child) CA 3-May-2006
The claimants had sought court orders against the hospital to secure continuing life-supporting treatment for their daughter who had been born very severely disabled. The Trust now sought their costs from the various actions.
Held: The parents . .
Cited – Barracks v Coles and Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis CA 21-Jul-2006
The claimant sought to allege race discrimination and appealed refusal by the respondents to release required documents. She had been turned down for an appointment to the Trident task force, and sought disclosure of the reasons. The respondent said . .
Cited – AVS v A NHS Foundation Trust and Another CA 17-Jan-2011
The claimant contracted sporadic Creutzfeldt Jakob’s Disease disease. He executed a Lasting Power of Attorney in favour of his brother, expressing to him that he should do whatever was possible to protract his life. The brother now sought treatment . .
Cited – Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v James SC 30-Oct-2013
The hospital where a gravely ill man had been treated had asked for a declaration that it would be in his best interests to withhold certain life-sustaining treatments from him. When can it be in the best interests of a living patient to withhold . .
Cited – Re JS (Disposal of Body) FD 10-Nov-2016
Child’s Wish for post-mortem cryonic Preservation
JS, a child of 14, anticipating her death from cancer expressed the desire that her body should receive cryonic preservation in the hope that one day a treatment might be available to allow her to be revived, and proceedings were issued. Her parents . .
Cited – An NHS Trust and Others v Y and Another SC 30-Jul-2018
The court was asked whether a court order must always be obtained before clinically assisted nutrition and hydration, which is keeping alive a person with a prolonged disorder of consciousness, can be withdrawn, or whether, in some circumstances, . .
Cited – N v ACCG and Others SC 22-Mar-2017
The local authority and a young man’s parents disputed his continued care, he having substantial incapacities. The parents wanted assistance caring for him on visits home. The LA declined to fund that support. The LA now argued that the CoP had not . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 September 2021; Ref: scu.229048

Dr John Harding Price v The General Medical Council: PC 7 Nov 2001

(Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC) The doctor appealed an order striking him off the register for unprofessional conduct. He complained that the Committee had a majority of lay rather than professional members, one doctor having withdrawn part way through the proceedings. The court rejected that, no objection having been taken at the time, it was too late. Equally he could have called expert psychiatric evidence if he had so wished, and the procedure of interim suspensions had been found to be fair. He asserted that the suspension was excessive, but since he still failed to appreciate why his behaviour was objectionable, any restoration might only lead to further acts. The decision stood.
Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Sir Andrew Leggatt
Appeal No 3 of 2001
PC
General Medical Council (Constitution of Fitness to Practise Committees) Rules 1996 Order in Council 1996 (SI 2125 of 1996), Medical Act 1983
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Wickramsinghe v United Kingdom ECHR 9-Dec-1997
(Commission) Although professional disciplinary proceedings may be conducted to the criminal standard of proof, that does not make them ‘akin to criminal proceedings’. ‘in general’, disciplinary proceedings are not ‘criminal’ for the purpose of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 September 2021; Ref: scu.166870

Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v James: SC 30 Oct 2013

The hospital where a gravely ill man had been treated had asked for a declaration that it would be in his best interests to withhold certain life-sustaining treatments from him. When can it be in the best interests of a living patient to withhold from him treatment which will keep him alive? On the other hand, when can it be in his best interests to inflict severely invasive treatment upon him which will bring him next to no positive benefit? The patient had now died.
Held: Jackson J’s decision at first instance was correct: ‘The most that can be said, therefore, is that in considering the best interests of this particular patient at this particular time, decision-makers must look at his welfare in the widest sense, not just medical but social and psychological; they must consider the nature of the medical treatment in question, what it involves and its prospects of success; they must consider what the outcome of that treatment for the patient is likely to be; they must try and put themselves in the place of the individual patient and ask what his attitude to the treatment is or would be likely to be; and they must consult others who are looking after him or interested in his welfare, in particular for their view of what his attitude would be. ‘
The Court of Appeal had reached the right conclusions but for the wrong reasons.
Baroness Hale interpreted the Bland decision: ‘the focus is on whether it is in the patient’s best interests to give the treatment, rather than on whether it is in his best interests to withhold or withdraw it. If the treatment is not in his best interests, the court will not be able to give its consent on his behalf and it will follow that it will be lawful to withhold or withdraw it. Indeed, it will follow that it will not be lawful to give it. It also follows that (provided of course that they have acted reasonably and without negligence) the clinical team will not be in breach of any duty towards the patient if they withhold or withdraw it.’
. . And as to withholding further life sustaining treatment in the context of a patient lacking capacity, observed that while: ‘the starting point is a strong presumption that it is in a person’s best interests to stay alive . . this is not absolute. There are cases where it will not be in a patient’s best interests to receive life-sustaining treatment’
and . . ‘The most that can be said, therefore, is that in considering the best interests of this particular patient at this particular time, decision-makers must look at his welfare in the widest sense, not just medical but social and psychological; they must consider the nature of the medical treatment in question, what it involves and its prospects of success; they must consider what the outcome of that treatment for the patient is likely to be; they must try and put themselves in the place of the individual patient and ask what his attitude to the treatment is or would be likely to be; and they must consult others who are looking after him or interested in his welfare, in particular for their view of what his attitude would be.’
Lord Neuberger, President, Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Clarke, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hughes
[2013] UKSC 67, [2014] 1 All ER 573, [2014] Med LR 1, [2014] 1 AC 591, (2014) 135 BMLR 1, [2013] BUS LR 1199, [2013] WLR(D) 421, [2014] 1 FCR 153, [2013] 3 WLR 1299, (2013) 16 CCL Rep 554, UKSC 2013/0134
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC Summary, SC
Mental Capacity Act 2005
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Airedale NHS Trust v Bland HL 4-Feb-1993
Procedures on Withdrawal of Life Support Treatment
The patient had been severely injured in the Hillsborough disaster, and had come to be in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). The doctors sought permission to withdraw medical treatment. The Official Solicitor appealed against an order of the Court . .
Cited – W v M and Others CoP 28-Sep-2011
Baker J pointed out that ‘there is a spectrum of minimal consciousness extending from patients who are only just above the vegetative state to those who are bordering on full consciousness.’ . .
Appeal from – Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v James and Others CA 1-Mar-2013
The patient had been found to lack capacity to litigate and make decisions as to his medical treatment. The Hospital appealed against rejection of its request for a declaration that it would be lawful to withhold treatment in the case of clinical . .
At COP – An NHS Trust v DJ and Others CoP 6-Dec-2012
DJ was severely ill and incapacitated. He was completely dependent on artificial ventilation and required regular tube suction. The hospital trust issued proceedings seeking declarations (1) that he lacked capacity to consent to or refuse treatment . .
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 – In re J (a Minor) (Wardship: Medical treatment) CA 1-Oct-1990
J was born at 27 weeks’, weighing only 1.1kg. He suffered very severe and permanent brain damage at the time of his birth, the brain tissue then lost being irreplaceable. He was epileptic and the medical evidence was that he was likely to develop . .
Cited – Regina v Cambridge Health Authority ex parte B CA 10-Mar-1995
The claimant challenged a refusal by the Authority to provide medical care of the sort requested.
Held: Lord Bingham said: ‘I have no doubt that in a perfect world any treatment which a patient, or a patient’s family, sought would be provided . .
Cited – Burke, Regina (on the Application of) v General Medical Council and others (Official Solicitor and others intervening) CA 28-Jul-2005
The claimant suffered a congenital degenerative brain condition inevitably resulting in a future need to receive nutrition and hydration by artificial means. He was concerned that a decision might be taken by medical practitioners responsible for . .
Cited – In Re B (A Minor) (Wardship: Medical Treatment) CA 1981
The child was born with Down’s Syndrome and an intestinal blockage. She needed the obstruction to be relieved if she was to survive. If the operation were performed, the child might die within a few months but it was probable that her life . .
Cited – W Healthcare NHS Trust v KH CA 17-Sep-2004
The patient was a lady aged 59, suffering multiple sclerosis. She had lost mental capacity to make her own decisions many years before. She appealed against a refusal of an order allowing the doctors to bring her life to an end.
Held: The . .
Cited – Wyatt v Portsmouth NHS Trust and Another FD 21-Apr-2005
Charlotte Wyatt had been born very premature and so severely disabled that her doctors sought and obtained an order that she should not be revived if she died. She had survived several months longer than expected and her parents had noticed . .
Cited – Re B (A Child) (Care Proceedings: Threshold Criteria) SC 12-Jun-2013
B had been removed into care at birth. The parents now appealed against a care order made with a view to B’s adoption. The Court was asked as to the situation where the risks were necessarily only anticipated, and as to appeals against a finding of . .

Cited by:
Cited – A NHS Foundation Trust v Ms X (By Her Litigation Friend, The Official Solicitor) CoP 8-Oct-2014
X suffered both severe anorexia and alcoholism. She had in the past been repeatedly and compulsorily admitted to hospital for treatment, but her doctors considered that whilst this might be life extending treatment it had proved ineffective and . .
Cited – Nicklinson and Another, Regina (on The Application of) SC 25-Jun-2014
Criminality of Assisting Suicide not Infringing
The court was asked: ‘whether the present state of the law of England and Wales relating to assisting suicide infringes the European Convention on Human Rights, and whether the code published by the Director of Public Prosecutions relating to . .
Cited – Re A Ward of Court FD 4-May-2017
Ward has no extra privilege from Police Interview
The court considered the need to apply to court in respect of the care of a ward of the court when the Security services needed to investigate possible terrorist involvement of her and of her contacts. Application was made for a declaration as to . .
Cited – N v ACCG and Others SC 22-Mar-2017
The local authority and a young man’s parents disputed his continued care, he having substantial incapacities. The parents wanted assistance caring for him on visits home. The LA declined to fund that support. The LA now argued that the CoP had not . .
Cited – An NHS Trust and Others v Y and Another SC 30-Jul-2018
The court was asked whether a court order must always be obtained before clinically assisted nutrition and hydration, which is keeping alive a person with a prolonged disorder of consciousness, can be withdrawn, or whether, in some circumstances, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 September 2021; Ref: scu.517230

NHS Trust v Y and Another: QBD 13 Nov 2017

Claim for a declaration under CPR Part 8 that it is not mandatory to bring before the Court the withdrawal of Clinically Assisted Nutrition and Hydration (‘CANH’) from a patient who has a prolonged disorder of consciousness in circumstances where the clinical team and the patient’s family are agreed that it is not in the patient’s best interests that he continues to receive that treatment, and that no civil or criminal liability will result if CANH is withdrawn.
Held: The declaration was granted, but the transfer to the Court of Protection refused. It was not established that there was any common law principle that all cases concerning the withdrawal of CANH from a person who lacks capacity had to be sanctioned by the court: ‘where the clinicians have followed the Mental Capacity Act and good medical practice, there is no dispute with the family of the person who lacks capacity or others interested in his welfare, and no other doubts or concerns have been identified, there is no requirement to bring the matter before the court.’ Such was the situation in Mr Y’s case, she considered, and accordingly she granted the following declaration: ‘It is not mandatory to bring before the court the withdrawal of CANH from Mr Y who has a prolonged disorder of consciousness in circumstances where the clinical team and Mr Y’s family are agreed that it is not in his best interests that he continues to receive that treatment.’
O’Farrell J
[2017] EWHC 2866 (QB), [2017] 4 WLR 222, [2017] WLR(D) 771
Bailii, WLRD
Mental Capacity Act 2005, European Convention on Human Rights 2 6
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – An NHS Trust and Others v Y and Another SC 30-Jul-2018
The court was asked whether a court order must always be obtained before clinically assisted nutrition and hydration, which is keeping alive a person with a prolonged disorder of consciousness, can be withdrawn, or whether, in some circumstances, . .
At First Instance – An NHS Trust and Others v Y and Another SC 30-Jul-2018
The court was asked whether a court order must always be obtained before clinically assisted nutrition and hydration, which is keeping alive a person with a prolonged disorder of consciousness, can be withdrawn, or whether, in some circumstances, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 September 2021; Ref: scu.601109

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 be read so as to make sure a complainant had such opportunity. Such a practice would always be disallowed under common law: ‘one of its principal effects was to ensure that the author of a complaint which had been rejected without due process had no way of finding this out unless it appeared on the face of the decision letter. A second effect, germane to this case, was that the rule was ineffective unless the PPC also adopted a policy of non-disclosure prior to its decision on referral. ‘
[2005] EWCA Civ 1520, Times 09-Jan-2006
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v The General Medical Council, ex parte Arpad Toth, Dr David Jarman Interested Party QBD 29-Jun-2000
A complaint to the General Medical Council should be heard in public unless there was some particular and pressing circumstance. Openness was required to maintain the confidence of the public in the profession, and complainants had a legitimate . .
Cited – Woods v The General Medical Council CA 18-Jul-2002
. .
Cited – Regina v General Medical Council, ex parte McNicholas Admn 2001
. .
Cited – Holmes, Regina (on the Application of) v General Medical Council CA 28-Oct-2002
. .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Board of Education v Rice HL 6-Apr-1911
A local education authority refused to pay salaries to teachers in a non-provided school at the same rate as it paid the teachers in provided schools. The managers of the non-provided school complained, and the Board of Education directed an . .
Cited – Swain v Hillman CA 21-Oct-1999
Strike out – Realistic Not Fanciful Chance Needed
The proper test for whether an action should be struck out under the new Rules was whether it had a realistic as opposed to a fanciful prospect of success. There was no justification for further attempts to explain the meaning of what are clear . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment ex parte Norwich City Council CA 1982
. .
Cited – Roberts v Parole Board HL 7-Jul-2005
Balancing Rights of Prisoner and Society
The appellant had been convicted of the murder of three police officers in 1966. His tariff of thirty years had now long expired. He complained that material put before the Parole Board reviewing has case had not been disclosed to him.
Held: . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 August 2021; Ref: scu.235930

Dr Tushar Kanti Bhadra: PC 10 Feb 1999

PC (General Medical Council) The Doctor appealed a finding of gross professional misconduct. It was argued that the committee had failed to give proper to his explanations.
Held: The findings were justified and also the appellant must have known of his incapacity to deal with the problems he faced. Appeal rejected.
Lord Steyn, Lord Clyde, Lord Hutton
[1999] UKPC 6
Bailii, PC
Medical Act 1983 36 40
Commonwealth

Updated: 24 August 2021; Ref: scu.174586

Hocsman: ECJ 14 Sep 2000

The blanket prohibition in Article 43 will prevent unjustified restrictions such as ‘French doctors cannot practise in the United Kingdom’, but the next step is to harmonise the basis on which the qualification is granted; otherwise it becomes impossible to compare like with like. The obligation to recognise qualifications in other member states extends to all diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications as well as to the relevant experience of the person concerned, irrespective of whether they were acquired in a Member State or in a third country, and it does not cease to exist as a result of the adoption of directives on the mutual recognition of diplomas.
C-238/98, [2000] ECR I-6623, [2000] EUECJ C-238/98
Bailii
Article 43 EC
European
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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 August 2021; Ref: scu.162433

Joyce v Secretary of State for Health: Admn 1 Aug 2008

The claimant appealed against a decision of the Care Standards Tribunal regarding misconduct, and being placed on the list to prevent her working with vulnerable adults. She was said to have fallen asleep while on night duty. The court considered the meaning of ‘misconduct’ within the section. On the appeal additional allegations were made, to which the appellant objected.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. Additional material might be used on appeal. The nature of the procedure inevitably meant that other matters might come to light only after the first reference by an employer. The definition in the statute did not limit the meaning of misconduct in any way, it was clear and unequivocal. The proceure had to be fair to the care worker, but also reflect the purpose of the legislation which was to protect vulnerable people.
Goldring J
[2008] EWHC 1891 (Admin), Times 29-Aug-2008
Bailii
Care Standards Act 2000 86(3)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina (Wright) v Secretary of State for Health CA 2-Jan-2008
The care worker’s appeal failed. The system for disciplining care workers and placing them on lists was required to be human rights compliant. Lord Justice May said: ‘There is an obvious and unchallenged public interest in having an appropriate . .
Cited – Regina (Wright) v Secretary of State for Health QBD 2008
The court was asked whether in a complaint under the Act, conduct before the Act could be considered.
Held: The Tribunal could rely on misconduct which had taken place, or the relevant provider’s opinion had been formed, before the . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions and another, ex parte Spath Holme Limited HL 7-Dec-2000
The section in the 1985 Act created a power to prevent rent increases for tenancies of dwelling-houses for purposes including the alleviation of perceived hardship. Accordingly the Secretary of State could issue regulations whose effect was to limit . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 August 2021; Ref: scu.272302

LG v The Independent Monitor: Admn 21 Dec 2017

The ECRC recorded the acquittal of a nurse on charges of theft from a patient, noting that her earlier admission of theft had been ruled inadmissible at trial, and the jury directed to acquit.
Held: The information had been properly included.
Lane J
[2017] EWHC 3327 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – AR, Regina (on The Application of) v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police and Another SC 30-Jul-2018
The appellant had been tried for and acquitted on a criminal charge. He now challenged the disclosure by the respondent of the charge in an Enhanced Criminal Record Certificate.
Held: His appeal failed. The critical question was whether the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 17 August 2021; Ref: scu.602591

Re D (A Child): CA 31 Oct 2017

The court considered an order effectively depriving child D of his liberty.
Sir James Munby P FD, David Richards, Irwin LJJ
[2017] EWCA Civ 1695, (2018) 160 BMLR 61, [2018] 2 FLR 13, [2018] COPLR 1, [2018] PTSR 1791
Bailii
Mental Capacity Act 2005, European Convention on Human Rights 8
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Birmingham City Council v D CoP 21-Jan-2016
D was a young adult with several disorders presenting challenging behaviour. The Hospital sought arrangements allowing control over him for his care and eucation. . .
Cited – In Re K (A Child) (Secure Accommodation Order: Right to Liberty) CA 29-Nov-2000
An order providing that a child should stay in secure accommodation, was an order which restricted the child’s liberty. A justification for such a restriction had to be brought within the exceptions listed in article 5.
Held: Detention for . .

Cited by:
Appeal From – In re D (A Child) SC 26-Sep-2019
D, a young adult had a mild learning disability and other more serious conditions. He was taken into a hospital providing mental health services. The external door was locked, and a declaration was sought to permit this deprivation of his liberty, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 August 2021; Ref: scu.598462

ABC v St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust and Others: CA 16 May 2017

Appeal from order striking out claim at common law as disclosing no reasonably arguable duty of care. The claimant’s father, whilst detained as a mental patient had been diagnosed with Huntington’s Disease, but the defendant, knowing that the claimant might also have the condition decided not to override medical confidence and inform her. The claimant was then diagnosed with the inheritable conition, but at a time when she was pregnant.
Held: The appeal was allowed, and the claim could proceed.
Gloster VP CA, Underhill, Irwin LJJ
[2017] EWCA Civ 336
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 8
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – James-Bowen and Others v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis SC 25-Jul-2018
The Court was asked whether the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (‘the Commissioner’) owes a duty to her officers, in the conduct of proceedings against her based on their alleged misconduct, to take reasonable care to protect them from . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 August 2021; Ref: scu.583967

Scally v Southern Health and Social Services Board: HL 1991

The plaintiffs were junior doctors employed by the respondents. Their terms had been collectively negotiated, and incorporated the Regulations. During the period of their employment different regulations had given and then taken way their right to purchase additional superannuation contributions. They had not been told of the rights and had failed to exercise them. They claimed damages for breach of contract and of statutory duty.
Held: The term was valuable and not negotiated with the plaintiffs. The defendants had a duty to bring the new rights to their attention. ‘If a duty of the kind in question is not inherent in the contractual relationship, I do not see how it could possibly be derived from the tort of negligence.’ The claims were not time barred because the obligation to inform had been continuing.
Lord Bridge
[1991] 4 All ER 563, [1992] 1 AC 294, [1991] IRLR 525
Contracts of Employment and Redundancy Payments Act (Northern Ireland) 1965 4(1) 5, Health Services (Superannuation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1962 (1962 (NI) 237), Health Services (Superannuation) (Amendment) (Number 3) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1974 (1974 (NI) 327)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI); Mahmud v Bank of Credit and Commerce International HL 12-Jun-1997
Allowance of Stigma Damages
The employees claimed damages, saying that the way in which their employer had behaved during their employment had led to continuing losses, ‘stigma damages’ after the termination.
Held: It is an implied term of any contract of employment that . .
Cited – Johnson v Unisys Ltd HL 23-Mar-2001
The claimant contended for a common law remedy covering the same ground as the statutory right available to him under the Employment Rights Act 1996 through the Employment Tribunal system.
Held: The statutory system for compensation for unfair . .
Cited – Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Lennon CA 20-Feb-2004
The claimant police officer considered being transferred to Northern Ireland. He asked and was incorrectly told that his housing allowance would not be affected by taking time off work.
Held: The break between employments had affected his . .
Cited – Crossley v Faithfull and Gould Holdings Ltd CA 16-Mar-2004
The employee claimant was to retire. On his employer’s negligent advice he resigned and opted for discretionary benefits.
Held: The employer owed no general duty of care to an employee’s financial interests. Nor could a term requiring such a . .
Cited – Bermuda Cablevision Limited and others v Colica Trust Company Limited PC 6-Oct-1997
(Bermuda) An alternative remedy to winding up is available to a shareholder where oppressive conduct is alleged, though the main thrust is that the conduct is unlawful. . .
Cited – Aitken v Standard Life Assurance Ltd SCS 3-Dec-2008
The pursuer averred that the defendant, his pension provider, had wrongfully reduced its final bonus by ten per cent without notifying him. He sought to imply a term into the contract to provide such an effect, saying that the contract promised an . .
Cited – Andrews v Kings College NHS Foundation Trust and Another EAT 12-Mar-2014
EAT Practice and Procedure : Appellate Jurisdiction or Reasons or Burns-Barke – The Claimant worked as a part-time nurse from 1982 to 2010. She claimed that she was entitled to pension rights or compensation for . .
Cited – James-Bowen and Others v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis SC 25-Jul-2018
The Court was asked whether the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (‘the Commissioner’) owes a duty to her officers, in the conduct of proceedings against her based on their alleged misconduct, to take reasonable care to protect them from . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 August 2021; Ref: scu.182108

AM v Disclosure and Barring Service, The Royal College of Nursing and The National Education Union: UTAA 10 Jun 2021

Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 – Application for review of inclusion on barred list under paragraph 18 of Schedule 3 to the 2006 Act – decision by Disclosure and Barring Service to grant or refuse permission to conduct review under para 18 – whether challenge by way of application for judicial review or statutory appeal to Upper Tribunal under section 4(1)(c) of 2006 Act – European Convention on Human Rights Article 6, whether judicial review an adequate remedy – BB v Disclosure and Barring Service (extension of time) [2019] UKUT 366 (AAC) considered and approved.
[2021] UKUT 136 (AAC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 09 August 2021; Ref: scu.666408

Stevens v University of Birmingham: QBD 31 Jul 2015

Andrews DBE J
[2017] ICR 96, [2015] CN 1379, [2016] ELR 457, [2015] Med LR 489, [2016] 4 All ER 258, [2015] IRLR 899
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – James-Bowen and Others v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis SC 25-Jul-2018
The Court was asked whether the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (‘the Commissioner’) owes a duty to her officers, in the conduct of proceedings against her based on their alleged misconduct, to take reasonable care to protect them from . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 August 2021; Ref: scu.550967

Gillberg v Sweden: ECHR 3 Apr 2012

(Grand Chamber) The applicant, a consultant psychiatrist, had conducted research with children under undertakings of absolute privacy. Several years later a researcher, for proper reasons, obtained court orders for the disclosure of the data under strict controls. He was not allowed to object because he was said to have no standing. Members of the applicant’s staff destroyed it rather than hand it over, and he was convicted.
Held: His claim failed. The constitutional right of freedom of official information went back over 200 years in Sweden, and a document is official if it is held by and is regarded as having been received or ‘drawn up’ by a public authority. The only complaints found admissible were as to his criminal conviction. As to that, he failed to establish any breach of his right to private life.
As to article 10, the claim amounted to a right of negative expression, which the court declined to exclude as a possibility but had not been established in this case.
The work was carried out in the name of the University, and belonged to it, and amounted to public documents within Swedish law. To allow a right on his behalf to assert control would infringe the University’s own rights in the data.
Nicolas Bratza, P
41723/06, [2012] ECHR 569
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 8 10
Human Rights
Citing:
3rd Section judgment – Gillberg v Sweden ECHR 2-Nov-2010
The applicant, professor in adolescent psychiatry had collected assorted data after having given undertakings to the parents of the children as to its absolute privacy. A sociologist had applied for and been given authority for its release by the . .
Cited – Akdivar and Others v Turkey ECHR 16-Sep-1996
ECHR Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (abuse of process); Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Violation of Art. 8; Violation of Art. 25-1; Violation of P1-1; No . .
Cited – Laskey, Jaggard and Brown v The United Kingdom ECHR 19-Feb-1997
A prosecution for sado-masochist acts was a necessary invasion of privacy to protect health. The Court found no violation where applicants were imprisoned as a result of sado-masochistic activities captured on video tape when police obtained . .
Cited – K And T v Finland ECHR 27-Apr-2000
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8; No violation of Art. 13; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings; Costs and expenses . .
Cited – Goc v Turkey ECHR 9-Nov-2000
The applicant had claimed compensation for unlawful detention and mistreatment during that detention; although the proceedings were civil in nature, they were governed by the code of criminal procedure. The applicant was not given an oral hearing . .
Cited – DH v Czech Repiublic ECHR 7-Feb-2006
The claimants, 18 Roma children complained, saying that they had automatically been placed in schools for children with special needs by virtue of their racial origin. . .
Cited – Leander v Sweden ECHR 26-Mar-1987
Mr Leander had been refused employment at a museum located on a naval base, having been assessed as a security risk on the basis of information stored on a register maintained by State security services that had not been disclosed him. Mr Leander . .
Cited – Gaskin v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Jul-1989
The applicant complained of ill-treatment while he was in the care of a local authority and living with foster parents. He sought access to his case records held by the local authority but his request was denied.
Held: The refusal to allow him . .
Cited – Sisojeva And Others v Latvia ECHR 16-Jun-2005
ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 8; No violation of Art. 34; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses – claim rejected. . .
Cited – Perna v Italy ECHR 25-Jul-2001
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 10; No violation of Art. 6-3-d + 6-1; No violation of Art. 10; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation . .
Cited – Ezelin v France ECHR 26-Apr-1991
The free speech of protesters should not be curtailed simply because of the unlawful behaviour of one or two individuals. The court considered that ‘that the freedom to take part in a peaceful assembly – in this instance a demonstration that had not . .
Cited – Niemietz v Germany ECHR 16-Dec-1992
A lawyer complained that a search of his offices was an interference with his private life.
Held: In construing the term ‘private life’, ‘it would be too restrictive to limit the notion of an ‘inner circle’ in which the individual may live his . .
Cited – Strohal v Austria ECHR 7-Apr-1994
(Commission) ‘the right to freedom of expression by implication also guarantees a ‘negative right’ not to be compelled to express oneself, that is, to remain silent’. Inadmissible . .
Cited – Goodwin v The United Kingdom ECHR 27-Mar-1996
An order for a journalist to reveal his source was a breach of his right of free expression: ‘The court recalls that freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and that the safeguards to be afforded to . .
Cited – Goc v Turkey ECHR 9-Nov-2000
The applicant had claimed compensation for unlawful detention and mistreatment during that detention; although the proceedings were civil in nature, they were governed by the code of criminal procedure. The applicant was not given an oral hearing . .

Cited by:
Cited – Vinter And Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 9-Jul-2013
(Grand Chamber) The three appellants had each been convicted of exceptionally serious murders, and been sentenced to mandatory life sentences, but with provision that they could not be eligible for early release, making them whole life terms. They . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 August 2021; Ref: scu.471310

W v Egdell: CA 9 Nov 1989

The plaintiff had been confined to a mental hospital after killing several people by shooting. He complained that when he was to be considered for release, his psychiatrist, the defendant had broken his duty of confidence by revealing his concerns about the plaintiff to the secure hospital with his care, despite the plaintiff have withdrawn his application for transfer to a non-secure unit.
Held: A doctor’s duty of confidence to his patient and the need to preserve general reliance upon that confidence could be overriden where there was a real risk of violence to others. The maintenance of a duty of confidence between doctor and patient was not a matter of private, but of public interest, and that public interest was to balanced against a similar interest in protecting members of the public against acts of violence: ‘As between the competing public interest in the duty of confidentiality . . and the public interest in disclosure of the report, the balance came down decisively in favour of disclosure because the number and nature of the killings . . were such that decisions leading directly or indirectly to (the plaintiff’s release from a secure hospital should not be made unless the authorities responsible . . were properly able to make an inform judgment that the risk of repetition of the killings was so small as to be acceptable. Accordingly, since (the psychiatrist) had highly relevant information about (the plaintiff’s condition) he had been justified in passing it on to those responsible for making decisions . . because the suppression of that information would have deprived the hospital and the Secretary of State of information which was relevant to questions of public safety . . ‘
Bingham LJ said: ‘Only the most compelling circumstances could justify a doctor in acting in a way which would injure the immediate interests of his patient, as the patient perceived them, without obtaining his consent.’
Bingham LJ said: ‘It has never been doubted that the circumstances here were such as to impose on Dr Egdell a duty of confidence owed to W. He could not lawfully sell the contents of his report to a newspaper . . Nor could he, without a breach of the law as well as professional etiquette, discuss the case in a learned article or in his memoirs or in gossiping with friends, unless he took appropriate steps to conceal the identity of W.’
Bingham LJ, Sir Stephen Brown P Sir John May
[1990] 1 Ch 359, [1990] 2 WLR 471, [1989] EWCA Civ 13, [1990] Ch 359
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – W v Egdell 1989
The psychiatrist had been engaged by W’s solicitors to examine him and prepare a report to go to the Tribunal hearing an application for the transfer or conditional discharge of W from a secure unit. His report was damning. W withdrew the . .

Cited by:
Cited – Grobbelaar v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another CA 18-Jan-2001
The claimant had been awarded andpound;85,000 damages in defamation after the defendant had wrongly accused him of cheating at football. The newspaper sought to appeal saying that the verdict was perverse and the defence of qualified privilege . .
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.
Updated: 28 July 2021; Ref: scu.381731

W v Egdell: 1989

The psychiatrist had been engaged by W’s solicitors to examine him and prepare a report to go to the Tribunal hearing an application for the transfer or conditional discharge of W from a secure unit. His report was damning. W withdrew the application. Knowing of the serious differences of opinion between those who had seen W, E sought the solicitors permission to disclose the report to the secure hospital holding W. That consent was not given, but E forwarded a copy anyway.
Held: A psychiatrist instructed on behalf of a detainee in a secure hospital to carry out an examination of him was entitled in the exercise of a public duty to disclose to the authorities responsible for his future management the results of his assessment (which were indicative of the detainee presenting a continuing danger) and that any duty of confidence was subordinate to that. The public interest in the circumstances outweighed the doctor’s duty of confidence to the plaintiff. The nature of a hearing before a Mental Health Review Tribunal is inquisitorial, not adversarial.
Scott J described the circumstances of the conviction: ‘About ten years ago W shot the four members of a neighbouring family. He shot another neighbour who had come to investigate the shooting. He then drove off in his car, throwing hand-made bombs as he did so. Later the same day he shot two more people, not neighbours, but strangers to him. Five of his victims died of their injuries. The other two needed major surgery for serious bullet wounds. W was diagnosed as suffering from paranoid schizophrenia. It was believed by the doctors who examined him that he had been suffering from this illness for about two years before the offences. The illness involved delusions that he was being persecuted by his neighbours. In the circumstances W’s plea of guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility was accepted by the Crown and he was convicted accordingly. Orders were made under sections 60 and 65 of the Mental Health Act 1959, now sections 37 and 41 of the Mental Health Act 1983, providing for his detention without limit of time. He was at first detained at Broadmoor Hospital. In 1981 he was transferred, in accordance with a transfer direction given by the Home Secretary, to a secure hospital in the North of England. Reference hereafter in this judgment to ‘the Hospital’ will be references to this hospital where W is still detained.’
Scott J
[1989] 1 All ER 1089, 1989] 2 WLR 689
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – X v Y 1987
Complaint was made that defendant newspapers were to publish confidential medical records of doctors suffering Aids. An injunction was sought to prevent use of records given to a journalist by a hospital employee. The records related to doctors in . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – W v Egdell CA 1990
The plaintiff was detained in a secure mental hospital, under a hospital order coupled with a restriction order, after pleading guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. The defendant, a consultant psychiatrist, was engaged . .
Appeal from – W v Egdell CA 9-Nov-1989
The plaintiff had been confined to a mental hospital after killing several people by shooting. He complained that when he was to be considered for release, his psychiatrist, the defendant had broken his duty of confidence by revealing his concerns . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 July 2021; Ref: scu.238534

X v Y: 1987

Complaint was made that defendant newspapers were to publish confidential medical records of doctors suffering Aids. An injunction was sought to prevent use of records given to a journalist by a hospital employee. The records related to doctors in general practice. The newspaper said it intended to do so in a way which would not allow identification of the doctors.
Held: The injunction was granted. The fact of the confidence in the records meant that the claimant did not have to establish any further prospective damage. Detriment had been established immediately the records were handed over, since this would discourage other patients approaching AIDS clinics. One of the doctors had already been harassed by the newspaper. Once the information had been acquired in breach of contract, it was for the defendants to show good reason for its publication. They had not discharged that burden. Allowing the paper to pick and choose what it published would make a mockery of the section, and the story published during the continuation of the proceedings and clearly been in contempt of court. The court emphasised the importance of confidentiality for medical health records.
Rose J said: ‘In the long run, preservation of confidentiality is the only way of securing public health; otherwise doctors will be discredited as a source of education, for future individual patients will not come forward if doctors are going to squeal on them. Consequently, confidentiality is vital to secure public as well as private health, for unless those infected come forward they cannot be counselled and self-treatment does not provide the best care’
Rose J
[1988] 2 All ER 648, (1987) 13 IPR 202
Contempt of Court Act 1981 10
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Mersey Care NHS Trust v Ackroyd QBD 7-Feb-2006
The trust, operators of Ashworth Secure Hospital sought from the defendant journalist disclosure of the name of their employee who had revealed to the defendant matters about the holding of Ian Brady, the Moors Murderer, and in particular medical . .
Cited – Mersey Care NHS Trust v Ackroyd CA 21-Feb-2007
The defendant journalist had published confidential material obtained from the claimant’s secure hospital at Ashworth. The hospital now appealed against the refusal of an order for him to to disclose his source.
Held: The appeal failed. Given . .
Cited – W v Egdell 1989
The psychiatrist had been engaged by W’s solicitors to examine him and prepare a report to go to the Tribunal hearing an application for the transfer or conditional discharge of W from a secure unit. His report was damning. W withdrew the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 July 2021; Ref: scu.238532

Family Planning Association of Northern Ireland v Minister for Health Social Services and Public Safety: CANI 8 Oct 2004

A termination of pregnancy is lawful when its continuation would threaten the woman’s life or when it would probably affect her physical or mental health but only if the effect would be serious and, in particular, permanent or long-term
Sheil LJ
[2004] NICA 37
Bailii
Northern Ireland
Cited by:
Cited – The Attorney General for Northern Ireland and Another v The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission CANI 29-Jun-2017
Appeal by the Attorney General and Department of Justice against an Order declaring that sections 58 and 59 of the 1861 Act and section 25 of the 1945 Act were incompatible with Article 8 of ECHR insofar as it is an offence:
(i) to procure a . .
Cited – Human Rights Commission for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland : Abortion) SC 7-Jun-2018
The Commission challenged the compatibility of the NI law relating to banning nearly all abortions with Human Rights Law. It now challenged a decision that it did not have standing to bring the case.
Held: (Lady Hale, Lord Kerr and Lord Wilson . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.219558

BAPIO Action Ltd and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another: QBD 9 Feb 2007

The claimants said that changes to the Highy Skilled Migrant Programme were unfairly introduced, that they had effectively barred non-EU doctors from applying for first tier doctor appointments, and that the guidance could properly be derived only from powers under the 1971 Act. The respondent denied that the rules came under the 1971 Act, being rather a matter of employment guidance only.
Held: The guidance was not universal in effect and the claim was rejected. An important evidential element in the demonstration of the discharge of the duty is the recording of the steps taken by the decision maker in seeking to meet the statutory requirements
Stanley Burnton J
[2007] EWHC 199 (QB)
Bailii
Immigration Act 1971
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – BAPIO Action Ltd and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another Admn 9-Feb-2007
. .

Cited by:
Appeal from – BAPIO Action Ltd and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another CA 9-Nov-2007
The action group appealed against refusal of a judicial review of guidelines as to the employment of non-EU doctors, saying that they were in effect immigration rules and issuable only under the 1971 Act. The court had said that since the guidance . .
At First Instance – BAPIO Action Ltd and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another HL 30-Apr-2008
The House considered whether the Secretary of State for Health acted lawfully in issuing guidance as to the employment of foreign doctors to employing bodies within the National Health Service in April 2006.
Held: The secretary of state’s . .
Cited – Jewish Rights Watch (T/A Jewish Human Rights Watch), Regina (on The Application of) v Leicester City Council Admn 28-Jun-2016
The claimant challenged the legaity of resolutions passed by three local authorities which were critical of the State of Israel. They said that the resolultions infringed the Public Sector Equality Duty under section 149 of the 2010 Act, and also . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 July 2021; Ref: scu.248444

Newcastle Upon Tyne NHS Foundation Trust v Haywood: CA 17 Mar 2017

The Trust had sent to the respondent a letter terminating her employment. The parties disputed when the notice took effect.
Held: Proudman J held that ‘the contents of the letter had to be communicated to the employee’.
Arden LJ held that the letter had to be ‘received’; where it has been delivered to the party’s address, there is a rebuttable presumption that it has been received; but that presumption had been rebutted by the judge’s finding that Mrs Haywood did not receive the letter until 27 April – there was no need for her to have read the letter but she had to have received it.
Lewison LJ dissented: ‘notice is validly given under the contract when a letter containing the notice actually arrives at the correct destination, whether the recipient is there to open it or not’
Arden DBE, Lewison LJJ, Proudman DBE J
[2017] EWCA Civ 153, [2018] 1 WLR 2073, [2018] ICR 882, [2018] 4 All ER 467, [2018] WLR(D) 265, [2018] IRLR 644
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v Haywood SC 25-Apr-2018
Notice of dismissal begins when received by worker
The court was asked: ‘If an employee is dismissed on written notice posted to his home address, when does the notice period begin to run? Is it when the letter would have been delivered in the ordinary course of post? Or when it was in fact . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2021; Ref: scu.581074

Remedy UK Ltd, Regina (On the Application of) v General Medical Council: Admn 27 Jul 2009

The claimant, a campaigning organisation with over 7,000 members in corporate form, seeks to effect change to proposed reforms in training medical doctors, and in particular now to challenge the government’s introduction of a new centralised web-based application system for the appointment of junior doctors to training posts.
Hickinbottom J
[2009] EWHC 2294 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 11 July 2021; Ref: scu.375176

Sandler v General Medical Council: Admn 14 May 2010

Nicol J considered the court’s jurisdiction under section 41A(10) and said: ‘Both parties agreed that the role of the Court was not confined to exercising a judicial review type jurisdiction. In other words, the power to terminate Dr Sandler’s suspension (or to substitute a different period) is not dependent on showing some error of law on the part of the IOP. That is the point that I understand the Court of Appeal to have made in GMC v Hiew [2007] 1 WLR 2007 where . . Arden LJ said ‘the powers conferred by s.41A(10) are also original powers and not merely powers of judicial review.’ In that case, the Court was directly concerned with an application to extend a doctor’s suspension. The maximum period for which an IOP can suspend a doctor is 18 months. Any longer extension can only be granted by the Court under s.41A(7). In such a situation, the only order or orders by the IOP will have expired (or be about to expire). If nothing further is done the suspension will come to an end. It is unsurprising in these circumstances that the Court of Appeal characterised the Court’s jurisdiction as ‘original’. The position with an application under s.41A(10) is different. The IOP has suspended Dr Sandler. His application is for that suspension to be terminated. My consideration of the application must surely start from the position that the IOP has thought that interim suspension is the right course. I also note that s.41A(10) applies ‘where an order has effect under any provision of this section’. One of the previous subsections is s.41A(7). Thus, it is open to a doctor whose order for suspension has been extended by the Court under that provision to apply for the suspension to be terminated under s.41A(10). There, too, the Court would surely have to start from the position that a suspension was currently in place before deciding whether that position ought to be altered. In R (Stephen James Walker) v GMC [2003] EWHC 2308 (Admin) Stanley Burnton J. (as he then was) was also considering an application to terminate a suspension under s.41A(10). He said at [3] ‘The terms of subsection 10 indicate that the appeal to the Court is a full appeal, that is to say, the Court does not interfere on a review ground but itself decides what order is appropriate.’ To describe the process as an ‘appeal’ may not do full justice to the power of the Court. It would seem to me that the Court does have power to consider subsequent developments and (where appropriate) fresh evidence. However, in my judgment the term does correctly acknowledge that in this context, unlike an application under s.41A(7), the Court is faced with an extant order of the IOP which it would only terminate if it thought that order was wrong.’
Nicol J
[2010] EWHC 1029 (Admin), (2010) 114 BMLR 141
Bailii
Medical Act 1983 41A
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – General Medical Council (GMC) v Hiew CA 30-Apr-2007
The doctor sought to challenge the extension of his suspension from practice.
Held: It was inappropriate in such an application to challenge the findings of fact which had led to the initial suspension. If he wished to do that, he should seek . .
Cited – Walker, Regina (on the Application of) v General Medical Council Admn 15-Aug-2003
Where a doctor sought to have lifted an extension to his suspension, the court should start from the position that the suspension was currently in place before deciding whether it needed altering. However, ‘The terms of subsection 10 indicate that . .

Cited by:
Approved – Bradshaw v General Medical Council Admn 4-Jun-2010
The doctor sought to end an order temporarily suspending his registration. He had been accused of dishonesty in his practice records, and of making false allegations against a fellow doctor. The suspension was pending the hearing. He was undergoing . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 20 June 2021; Ref: scu.414965

Vaidya v General Medical Council: Admn 18 Sep 2008

The claimant sought, and was refused, permission to pursue judicial review of the defendant’s disciplinary proceedings against him.
Burnett J
[2008] EWHC 2749 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
See Also – Vaidya v General Medical Council QBD 16-Nov-2010
Adjourned application to set aside a general civil restraint order. One issue was as to a claim brought upon a letter to the GMC. The judge said: ‘It appears to me to be clear beyond argument that this letter is protected by absolute privilege since . .
See also – Vaidya v General Medical Council QBD 2010
Sir Charles Gray said: ‘It appears to me to be clear beyond argument that this letter is protected by absolute privilege since it was written to an official of an investigatory body (the GMC) in order to complain about the conduct of Dr Vaidya.’ . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 20 June 2021; Ref: scu.426050