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:

AppliedChatterjee 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. . .
CitedSkidmore 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 followedBhanot 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 . .
PreferredSaeed 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