Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Health Professions - From: 2000 To: 2000

This page lists 32 cases, and was prepared on 27 May 2018.

 
Bhanot v South West London and St George's Mental Hospital NHS Trust [2000] Lloyd's Rep Med 324
2000
ChD
Bell J
Health Professions, Employment
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 deciding was whether on the information before it the case of breach of contract is sufficiently strong to make the order sought.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Saeed v Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust [2000] Lloyd's Rep Med 331
2000

Gage J
Employment, Health Professions

1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Re A (Male Sterilisation) [2000] 1 FLR 549
2000
CA
Thorpe LJ, Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss President
Health, Health Professions
The court considered the duties of a doctor, asking whether a procedure should be undertaken for a patient without the capacity to consent: Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss said: "The doctor, acting to that required standard, has, in my view, a second duty, that is to say, he must act in the best interests of a mentally incapacitated patient." and "In my judgment best interests encompasses medical, emotional and all other welfare issues." and (Thorpe) "the evaluation of best interests is akin to a welfare appraisal . . Pending the enactment of a checklist or other statutory direction . . the first instance judge with the responsibility to make an evaluation of the best interests of a claimant lacking capacity should draw up a balance sheet. The first entry should be of any factor or factors of actual benefit. In the present case an instance would be the acquisition of foolproof contraception. Then on the other sheet the judge should write any counterbalancing dis-benefits to the applicant. An obvious instance in this case would be the apprehension of risk and the discomfort inherent in the operation. Then the judge should enter on each sheet the potential gains and losses in each instance making some estimate of the extent of the possibility that the gain or loss might accrue. At the end of that exercise the judge should be better placed to strike a balance between the sum of the certain and possible gains against the sum of the certain and possible losses. Obviously, only if the account is in relatively significant credit will the judge conclude that the application is likely to advance the best interests of the claimant."
1 Citers


 
Dr Rajan v The General Medical Council [2000] UKPC 1; Appeal No 18 of 1999
19 Jan 2000
PC

Health Professions

Medical Act 1983
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ]
 
Kent v Griffiths and others [2000] EWCA Civ 3017; [2000] 2 WLR 1158; [2000] 2 All ER 474; [2001] QB 36; [2000] PIQR P57; [2000] Lloyd's Rep Med 109
3 Feb 2000
CA
Lord Woolf MR
Professional Negligence, Personal Injury, Health Professions
A doctor attended the home of a patient suffering from an asthma attack and called for an ambulance to take her immediately to hospital. The control replied "Okay doctor." After 13 minutes the ambulance had not arrived and the patient's husband made a further call. He was told that an ambulance was well on the way and should arrive in seven or eight minutes. For unexplained reasons it did not arrive until 40 minutes after the first call. The patient suffered a respiratory arrest which would have been prevented if the ambulance had arrived in a reasonable time. The patient's doctor gave evidence that if she had been told that it would take the ambulance service 40 minutes to come, she would have advised the patient's husband to drive her to hospital and would have gone with them. Held. The defendant owed a duty of care to the claimant. The ambulance service, as part of the health service, should be regarded as providing services equivalent to those provided by hospitals, and not as providing services equivalent to those rendered by the police and fire services. Accordingly, the staff of the ambulance service owed a similar duty of care to that owed by doctors and nurses operating in the health service.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Dr Ram Pratap Saxena v The General Medical Council [2000] UKPC 3; (Appeal No 39 of 1999)
7 Feb 2000
PC

Health Professions

Medical Act 1983
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ]
 
Kent v Griffiths and Others (No 2) Times, 10 February 2000; Gazette, 17 February 2000; [2000] 2 All ER 474; [2001] 1 QB 36; [2000] EWCA Civ 25
10 Feb 2000
CA
Lord Woolf MR Aldous and Laws LJJ
Professional Negligence, Health Professions
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."
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Dr Alexandra Maria Idenburg v General Medical Council [2000] UKPC 13
23 Mar 2000
PC

Health Professions

Medical Act 1983
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ]
 
Nwabueze v General Medical Council Times, 11 April 2000; [2000] UKPC 16; (Appeal No 21 of 1999); [2000] 1 WLR 1760
6 Apr 2000
PC
Lord Hope of Craighead
Health Professions, Human Rights, Natural Justice
Deliberations of the professional conduct committee hearing a case of professional conduct were in the presence of an assessor who gave advice to the committee. After returning from deliberation the assessor described the advice given, and the chairman announced his decision. Held: This infringed the right under article 8 of the doctor to a fair trial since he was not allowed to comment on the advice given. Allegations which were irrelevant to the doctor's practice should be deleted from the charge list presented. As to the lay member's presence on the Professional Conduct Committee of the General Medical Council, Lord Hope of Craighead said: "From this summary it can be seen that Mrs. Walker was and is eminently well qualified to sit on the Professional Conduct Committee as one of its lay members. She brought to that membership an extensive knowledge of the health service in Wales, as a result of having worked there for many years as ~ nurse and midwife and her period of service as director of the South East Wales Institute. It is in the public interest that those who serve as lay members on disciplinary bodies of this kind should be well-informed and have experience of working in the area within which cases are likely to arise on which they may be called upon to adjudicate. It could not possibly be suggested that there was anything in Mrs. Walker's general background that would be likely to give rise to the danger or possibility of bias on her part when she was considering a case from Wales."
Medical Act 1983 - European Convention on Human Rights 8
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ]
 
Dr Mohinder Singh v The General Medical Council [2000] UKPC 15; Appeal No 64 of 1999
6 Apr 2000
PC

Health Professions

Medical Act 1983
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ]
 
Dad v The General Dental Council Times, 19 April 2000; [2000] UKPC 17; Appeal No 29 of 1999; [2000] 1 WLR 1538
13 Apr 2000
PC
Lord Hope
Health Professions, Employment
A dentist was convicted of traffic offences including driving whilst disqualified. He was suspended from practising as a dentist for 12 months. He appealed, and the court substituted a suspension from practice itself suspended for two years. That would give ample opportunity for the appellant to demonstrate or otherwise his ability not to re-offend. The offences were not directly related to his capacity to practice and it was important to keep a proper proportion between the offence and the very severe consequences of a suspension.
Lord Hope said: "It is well established, for very good reasons, that the Board will not interfere with the exercise of the discretion of a Professional Conduct Committee in matters relating to penalty. The assessment of the seriousness of the misconduct upon proof of a conviction is essentially a matter for the Committee, in the light of their experience of the range of cases which come before them. They are best qualified to judge what measures are required to maintain the standards and reputation of the profession and to assess the seriousness of any misconduct. As a general rule therefore the Board will be very slow to interfere with the decision of the Committee on matters relating to penalty."
General Dental Council Professional Conduct Committee (Procedure) Rules 1984 Order of Council 1984 (1984 No 1517) - Dentists Act 1984
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ]
 
Phipps v Royal Australasian College of Surgeons [2000] UKPC 18; (Appeal No 33 of 1999)
13 Apr 2000
PC

Health Professions, Commonwealth
PC New Zealand
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ]

 
 Powell v United Kingdom; ECHR 4-May-2000 - 45305/99; (2000) 30 EHRR CD 152; [2000] ECHR 703
 
CLT v Connon [2000] SASC 223
8 May 2000

Gray J
Commonwealth, Negligence, Health Professions
Austlii (Supreme Court of South Australia) The father, the appellant, was accused of sexually abusing his three children. He sued for damages alleging negligence on the part of the medical practitioners who examined the children for signs of sexual abuse and on the part of the Department of Community Welfare who requested that police investigations be carried out and who took steps to ensure children were not returned to the care of the appellant - appellant's relationship with his children significantly impaired - appellant conceded that previous decision of this Court in Hillman v Black could not be distinguished - Master considered himself bound by Hillman v Black and struck out claim as disclosing no cause of action. Whether recent High Court decisions dealing with the approach to be taken to duty of care require a reconsideration of Hillman v Black - whether duty of care was owed to appellant by medical practitioners and/or Department of Community Welfare when investigating and reporting the claims of sexual abuse. Gray J "Devastating consequences can follow an incorrect finding that a child has been sexually abused. Those consequences flow not only to the person against whom the findings are made, but also to the child and the family."
1 Citers

[ Austlii ]

 
 Regina v Tabassum; CACD 11-May-2000 - Times, 26 May 2000; Gazette, 31 May 2000; [2000] 2 CAR 328; [2000] EWCA Crim 90; [2000] 2 Cr App Rep 328; [2000] Crim LR 686; [2000] Lloyds Rep Med 404; [2000] All ER (D) 649
 
Toth and Another, Regina (On The Application of) v General Medical Council [2000] 1 WLR 2209; [2000] EWHC Admin 361
23 Jun 2000
Admn
Lightman J
Health Professions, Judicial Review
Lightman J said: "The general principle is well established that, if an applicant establishes in judicial review proceedings that the decision which he challenges is bad in law, he should be granted relief, and most particularly an order quashing that decision, unless there are strong reasons in public policy for refusing relief or unless to quash the decision would occasion so great an injustice either to the respondent or to a third party as to require some other course to be taken."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Regional Director of Public Director (Health?) ex parte X CO/3584/199; Unreported, 29 June 2000
29 Jun 2000

Moses J
Health Professions
(name?) An alert letter issued by the Department of Health as to the unsafety of a practioner may clearly be "gravely prejudicial to a practitioner seeking employment".
1 Citers


 
Regina v The General Medical Council, ex parte Arpad Toth, Dr David Jarman Interested Party Times, 29 June 2000; Gazette, 06 July 2000; [2000] EWHC Admin 361; [2000] 1 WLR 2209
29 Jun 2000
QBD

Human Rights, Health Professions
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 expectation of a public investigation. Where a practitioner continued in practice, the screeners should be reluctant to disallow continuance of a complaint where there was any doubt at all about the need to proceed.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Wagstaff and Another, Regina (On the Application of) v Secretary Of State for Health [2000] EWHC 634 (Admin)
20 Jul 2000
Admn
Kennedy LJ, Jackson J
Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Dr Ashwini Kumar Singh v The General Medical Council Appeal No 37 of 1999
25 Aug 2000
PC

Health Professions

[ PC ]
 
Dr Ashwini Kumar Singh v The General Medical Council [2000] UKPC 32
25 Aug 2000
PC

Health Professions
PC Medical Act 1983
Medical Act 1983
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Hocsman C-238/98; [2000] ECR I-6623; [2000] EUECJ C-238/98
14 Sep 2000
ECJ

European, Health Professions
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.
Article 43 EC
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Roger Bainton v The General Dental Council (Reasons for decision upon a notice of motion)
14 Sep 2000
PC

Health Professions
PC Dentists Act 1984
Dentists Act 1984
[ PC ] - [ PC ]
 
Sindicato de Medicos de Asistancia Publica (SIMAP) v Colsilieria de Sanidad y Consumo de la Generalidad Valenciana Times, 18 October 2000; [2000] ICR 1116; C-303/98; [2000] IRLR 845; [2000] EUECJ C-303/98
3 Oct 2000
ECJ

European, Employment, Health Professions, European, European
Doctors working in primary health care teams are subject to the Working Time Directive. They are not to be assimilated as public service workers alongside emergency services. All time on call was working time and overtime if present at a health centre, but if merely contactable then the rules applied to the time actually spent. Merely being on call at night regularly did not make them night workers, but they could be classed as shift workers where appropriate. Consents given collectively by a trade union are not to be equated with consent given by the doctor himself.
ECJ Social policy - Protection of the safety and health of workers - Directives 89/391/EEC and 93/104/EC - Scope - Doctors in primary health care teams - Average period of work - Inclusion of time on call - Night workers and shift workers
Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work - Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Dr Gnanapragasam Anton Joseph Selvanathan v The General Medical Council Times, 26 October 2000; (Appeal No 21 of 2000; [2000] UKPC 37
11 Oct 2000
PC

Administrative, Health Professions
Decisions of the Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC should now be accompanied by explanations. Earlier practice of issuing a bare decision had been superseded by general practice in decision making bodies, and also by detailed rules governing the practice of the committee. Fairness required reasons to be given so that the disciplined doctor could make an informed decision on whether to appeal.
General Medical Council Preliminary Proceedings and Professional Conduct Committee (Procedure) Rules 1988 Order in Council 1988/2255 - Medical Act 1983
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ]
 
Bainton v General Dental Council Times, 17 October 2000
17 Oct 2000
PC

Health Professions
Although the procedures set down for appealing against decisions of the Council to the Privy Council did not include provision for extensions of time for applications out of time, the inherent discretion of the judicial committee included the power to grant such an extension where the justice of the case so required.

 
Regina v Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, Ex Parte Mahmood and Another Times, 17 October 2000
17 Oct 2000
QBD

Health Professions, Education
It was proper for a professional body granting rights to practice by means of examination tests, to limit the number of attempts at such examinations. Although such a limit did operate as a restraint of trade, that restraint was justified in order to protect the public and maintain professional integrity. The maximum was not required to be imposed by statute, but it could not be said to be irrational.
Pharmacy Act 1954 16

 
Dr Manjula Krippendorf v The General Medical Council Times, 29 November 2000; [2000] UKPC 45; [2001] 1 WLR 1054
24 Nov 2000
PC

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

[ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ]
 
Jones v The Royal of Veterinary Surgeons [2000] UKPC 47; Appeal No 18 of 2000
29 Nov 2000
PC

Health Professions
(Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons)
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ]

 
 Quirk v Burton Hospitals NHS Trust Secretary of State for Health; EAT 4-Dec-2000 - Times, 19 February 2002; EAT/1031/99
 
Regina on Application of Paul Zietsman and Marius Schmulian v Dental Practice Board [2000] EWHC Admin 433
13 Dec 2000
Admn

Health Professions, Crime

[ Bailii ]

 
 Dr Mohammed Saeed v Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust; CA 20-Dec-2000 - Times, 17 January 2001; [2000] EWCA Civ 342; [2001] ICR 903; [2000] Lloyd's Rep Med 331
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.