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 He complained that the Committee had a majority of lay rather than professional members, one doctor having withdrawn part way through the proceedings.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
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
CitedWickramsinghe 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