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: 2002 To: 2002

This page lists 47 cases, and was prepared on 27 May 2018.

 
Doctor Beynon and Partners v Commissioners of Customs and Excise [2002] EWHC 518 Ch
2002
ChD
Lawrence Collins J
VAT, Health Professions

1 Citers


 
Skidmore v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust Times, 18 January 2002; Gazette, 06 March 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 18; (2003) 69 BMLR 13; [2002] ICR 403; [2002] Lloyd's Rep Med 299
15 Jan 2002
CA
Lord Justice Aldous, Lord Justice Keene and Sir Christopher Slade
Employment, Health Professions, Employment, Damages
The appellant was a doctor accused of lying to a patient about the details of an operation. He appealed a decision dismissing him. Held: Such an allegation was an allegation of professional misconduct, and should have been dealt with as such, and not by way of dismissal and the employment tribunal system. Professional misconduct was defined in the section as 'Performance or behaviour of practitioners arising from the exercise of medical or dental skills' In the case of doubt it would normally be preferable for a Health authority to proceed on the basis that it was profession not personal misconduct. The reply was given as part of the performance of his professional duties.
Department of Health Circular 90(9)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Dr Thomas Amadeus Keiran Norton v The General Medical Council Appeal No 77 of 2001; [2002] UKPC 6
11 Feb 2002
PC
Lord Hutton Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough Lord Rodger of Earlsferry
Health Professions
The appellant doctor had practised in plastic and related surgery, particularly liposuction. The complaints against him related to a failure to supervise his staff, wrongful delegation, and lack of care. His name had been erased from the register, rather than suspended. He appealed. Held: The jurisdiction of the Council is appellate rather than supervisory. The doctor's failings had been repeated. Since the assumption which followed erasure was that this was for life, he could not complain at the period of five years imposed.
Medical Act 1983
1 Cites

[ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ Dr Thomas Amadeus Keir' target-'_ext'>PC ] - [ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Dr Marta Stefan v The General Medical Council (The Health Committee of the GMC) (No 2) Times, 29 March 2002; [2002] UKPC 10
6 Mar 2002
PC
Lord Steyn, Sir Andrew Leggatt and Sir Philip Otton
Health Professions
(The Health Committee of the GMC) The GMC had decided that the registration of the appellant in the register of medical practitioners should remain suspended indefinitely as her fitness to practise had been found to be seriously impaired. She appealed. Held: The Act limited the jurisdiction of the Council under the Act to appeals on issues of law. Nevertheless, the Council could act to prevent unfairness or injustice, and the Act should be interpreted sympathetically if need be. It was within the Board's jurisdiction to consider whether there was any or sufficient evidence to support a material finding. However the appellant could show no such failure.
Medical Act 1983 40(5)
[ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Regina (Howard and Another) v Secretary of State for Health Times, 28 March 2002; Gazette, 23 May 2002
15 Mar 2002
QBD
Justice Scott Baker
Administrative, Health Professions, Human Rights
The applicants sought orders that enquiries into the activities of doctors under the Act should be held in public. Held: The Act contained no presumption that enquiries should be in public, and the Wagstaff case created no general principle to that effect. The right to free expression did not include the right to receive from others information they were unwilling to impart. It was for the Secretary of State to make a decision in each case, and his decisions stood.
National Health Service Act 1977 2 - European Convention on Human Rights Art 10.1
1 Cites


 
Woodcock v Secretary of State for Health [2002] EWCST 4(PC)
29 Apr 2002
CST

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
British Medical Association v Chaudhary [2002] UKEAT 1351_01_3004
30 Apr 2002
EAT

Employment, Health Professions, Discrimination

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Garfoot v General Medical Council [2002] UKPC 35
2 May 2002
PC

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Dr Narumanchi Sai Baba v The General Medical Council (2) [2002] UKPC 22
15 May 2002
PC

Health Professions
PC The Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC
[ Bailii ]
 
Glover v Secretary of State for Health [2002] EWCST 3(PC)
24 May 2002
CST

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]

 
 Afshar v Chester; CA 27-May-2002 - Times, 13 June 2002; Gazette, 18 July 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 724; [2003] QB 356; [2002] 3 All ER 552; [2002] 3 WLR 1195; 67 BMLR 66
 
Dr John Adrian Garfoot v The General Medical Council Appeal No 81 0f 2001
19 Jun 2002
PC

Health Professions
PC Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC
[ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ]
 
Black v Secretary of State for Health [2002] EWCST 8(PC)
20 Jun 2002
CST

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Hollingworth, Regina (on the Application of) v Specialist Training Authority of the Medical Rolyal Colleges [2002] EWHC 1214 (Admin)
21 Jun 2002
Admn

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Dr Marinovich v The General Medical Council [2002] UKPC 36
24 Jun 2002
PC
Lord Hope of Craighead Sir Christopher Slade Sir Philip Otton
Health Professions
PC Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC. The applicant had been suspended from practice. He had been struck off in Australia, and moved to the UK to practice. The GMC sought to suspend him because of the findings in Australia. After his initial suspension new procedures came in, and an interim order was made imposing conditions as to his practice. Later, when the case came before the full committee further complaints were made as to his failure to follow the conditions. Held: Despite the existence of some doubts about the finding of professional misconduct in Australia, that shown in England was not in doubt. The erasure of his name was appropriate, and would not be set aside.
Lord Hope said: "In the appellant's case the effect of the committee's order is that his erasure is for life but it has been said many times that the Professional Conduct Committee is the body which is best equipped to determine questions as to the sanction that should be imposed in the public interest for serious professional misconduct. This is because the assessment of the seriousness of the misconduct is essentially a matter for the committee in the light of its experience. It is the body which is best qualified to judge what measures are required to maintain the standards and reputation of the profession.
That is not to say that their lordships may not intervene if there are good grounds for doing so. But in this case their lordships are satisfied that there are no such grounds. This is a case of such a grave nature that the finding that the appellant was unfit to practice was inevitable. The committee was entitled to give greater weight to the public interest and to the need to maintain public confidence in the profession than to the consequences to the appellant of the imposition of the penalty. Their lordships are quite unable to say that the sanction of erasure which the committee decided to impose in this case while undoubtedly severe was wrong or unjustified."
Medical Act 1983 42(3) - Medical Act 1983 (Amendment) Order 2000 (SI 2000/1803)
1 Citers

[ PC ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Mogford v Secretary of State for Education and Skills [2002] EWCST 11(PC)
26 Jun 2002
CST

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Dr Mohamed Shaker Haikel v The General Medical Council (Appeal No 37 of 2002); [2002] UKPC 37; (Appeal No 37 of 2002)
4 Jul 2002
PC

Health Professions
PC Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC
[ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Chaudhary v Royal College of Surgeons of Great Britain, Ireland and others [2002] EWCA Civ 1166
5 Jul 2002
CA

Discrimination, Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Dr Maya Chaudhury v The General Medical Council [2002] UKPC 41
15 Jul 2002
PC

Health Professions
PC Committee on Professional Performance of the GMC
[ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Christine Woods v The General Medical Council [2002] EWHC 1484 (Admin)
18 Jul 2002
CA
The Honourable Mr Justice Stanley Burnton
Health Professions

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Cunningham v Secretary of State for Health [2002] EWCST 2(PC)
12 Aug 2002
CST

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Hudson v Secretary of State for Education and Skills [2002] EWCST 10(PC)
15 Aug 2002
CST

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Elizabeth Morag Crabbie v The General Medical Council Times, 10 October 2002; [2002] UKPC 45
23 Sep 2002
PC

Health Professions
(The Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC) The doctor had been convicted of causing death by dangerous driving and driving with excess alcohol. She appealed an order striking her name from the Register, saying that because of her alcoholism, the Professional Conduct Committee should have instead referred her to the health Committee. Held: A reference to the Health Committee was discretionary, and could be made at one of several stages. However the Health committee had no power itself to order erasure from the register, and where that was a serious possibility, such a reference was inappropriate, since it implied that erasure would not follow.
Medical Act 1983 36(1)
[ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Uruakpa, Regina (on the Application Of) v British Council [2002] EWCA Civ 1742
8 Oct 2002
CA
Laws LJ
Immigration, Health Professions
Application for permission to appeal a decision refusing the claimant and his wife, permission to seek judicial review of the British Council's decision not to renew their sponsorship of the claimant.
[ Bailii ]
 
Dr Christopher Dare v The General Medical Council [2002] UKPC 54
16 Oct 2002
PC

Health Professions
(The Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC) The patient started psychotherapy with a therapist because she was having problems establishing personal relationships. After that therapist died, she received treatment from Dr Dare, some three times a week. After two years, he initiated sexual intimacy during his consultations; this continued over several months (and included one incident of intercourse when he went to her home). The therapy was "particularly intense and long term" and the patients undertaking it as "extremely vulnerable"; Dr Dare conceded that this patient was "functioning as a child". The PCC were not prepared to conclude that there was no risk. Held: The erasure of a consultant psychiatrist was upheld based on his admitted relationship with a patient.
1 Citers

[ PC ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Birmingham Care Consortium, Regina (on the Application Of) and others v Birmingham City Council [2002] EWHC 2188 (Admin)
17 Oct 2002
Admn

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Whyatt v Ofsted [2002] EWCST 73(EY)
21 Oct 2002
CST

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Dr Tushar Kanti Bhadra v The General Medical Council [2002] UKPC 55
22 Oct 2002
PC
Lord Hope of Craighead, Sir Denis Henry, Sir Philip Otton
Health Professions
PC (The Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC) The doctor had been suspended after a finding of serious professional misconduct. He had subsequently been re-registered on a conditional basis for twelve months. He began an appeal, but it was not taken forward withdrew by agreement anticipating a withdrawal. The applicant sought now to revive the appeal, and the Council sought its dismissal. Held: The Council had jurisdiction to dismiss an appeal for want of prosecution, and some grounds of appeal merely re-iterated grounds previously dismissed. 'Section 36(4) of the 1983 Act provides that, where the Professional Conduct Committee have given a direction for conditional registration, they shall not extend any period of conditional registration under that section for more than twelve months at a time. But where the registered person exercises his right of appeal under section 40 an adjustment is made to the timetable. The effect of the appeal is that the conditions which were previously attached to his registration continue to attach to it until the direction that his registration is to be conditional for an extended period takes effect under paragraph 10 of Schedule 4 or the appeal is determined otherwise than by its being dismissed. If, as in this case, the appeal is determined by the dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution, the extended period begins to run from the date when the direction takes effect on the determination of the appeal and not from any earlier date.' The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution.
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Dr Sampige Nanjundiah Sreenath v The General Medical Council [2002] UKPC 56
23 Oct 2002
PC

Health Professions
PC The Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Holmes, Regina (on the Application of) v General Medical Council [2002] EWCA Civ 1838; [2002] All ER (D) 412
28 Oct 2002
CA

Health Professions

1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
British Medical Association v Chaudhary [2002] EWCA Civ 1710
1 Nov 2002
CA

Discrimination, Health Professions

1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Walker v General Medical Council Times, 16 November 2002; [2002] UKPC 57
5 Nov 2002
PC
Hope of Craighead, Walker of Gestingthorpe
Health Professions
(The Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC) The doctor appealed a decision of the GMC to erase his name. He complained that the legal assessor had exceeded his role, by giving his opinion as to the appropriate sanction, namely erasure. Held: Difficulties had been created by differing memories of the events at the hearing, which should be avoided in future by the taking of satisfactory records of interventions even in in camera deliberations. However the expression of such an opinion could not be part of the role of the legal assessor, even though it was clear that in this case the opinion had not influence the committee. The assessor's task was to provide legal advice. Here though, he had also offered advice as to the possibility of attaching conditions, whilst the proceedings were in camera. The rules clearly required his advice either to be given in the presence of all parties, or to be brought to the attention of the other party later. There had been a procedural irregularity, and the case was remitted.
General Medical Council (Legal Assessors) Rules 1980 (1980 SI No 941) 4
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Dr Anthony Peter Hall vThe General Medical Council [2002] UKPC 61
14 Nov 2002
PC

Health Professions
PC The Health Committee of the GMC
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Whitefield v General Medical Council Times, 29 November 2002; [2002] UKPC 62
14 Nov 2002
PC
Hope of Craighead L, Sir Denis Jenry, Sir Philip Otton
Human Rights, Health Professions
The doctor had been allowed to continue in practice only on condition that he did not drink alcohol and that he complied with other conditions to support that restriction. He challenged it as an infringement of his human rights. Held: The conditions were in pursuit of a legitimate aim, and in the wider interest of protecting his patients. There were limits to the right to a private life, and those had not been transgressed.
European Convention on Human Rights Art 8
1 Cites

[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Mental Health Care (Wirral) Ltd (Acrefield House) v National Care Standards Commission [2002] EWCST 41(NC)
14 Nov 2002
CST

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Mental Health Care (Wirral) Ltd (Acrefield House) v National Care Standards Commission [2002] EWCST 0041(NC)
14 Nov 2002
CST

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Felden Croft Nursing Home Ltd v National Care Standards Commission [2002] EWCST 81(NC)
18 Nov 2002
CST

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Uruakpa, Regina (on the Application Of) v British Council [2002] EWCA Civ 1749
18 Nov 2002
CA

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Re A Care Home [2002] EWCST 32(NC)
29 Nov 2002
CST

Health Professions
Guidance on the correct approach to transfer of conditions and categories.
[ Bailii ]
 
Bannister (Silverlands Care Home) v National Care Standards Commission [2002] EWCST 32(NC)
29 Nov 2002
CST

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Smith, Regina (On the Application of) v East Kent Hospital NHS Trust and Another [2002] EWHC 2640 (Admin)
4 Dec 2002
Admn
Silber J
Health Professions
Challenge to decision to re-organise hospitals.
[ Bailii ]
 
Dr Ramachandran Subramanian v The General Medical Council [2002] UKPC 64
5 Dec 2002
PC
Sir Dennis Henry
Health Professions
PC (The Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC) The appellant, a locum general practitioner, had been charged with failing to examine a patient adequately and take prompt action to refer her to hospital. At the hearing before the Committee he became aware of newspaper reports of a previous finding against him of serious professional misconduct in 1987, which had led to him being admonished. One member of the Committee had read the article, and mentioned it to others. The GMC Press Office had contributed to the disclosure by wrongly informing the newspaper that it was safe for them to refer to the previous appearance. The hearing had continued, resulting in a finding of serious professional misconduct. The Committee had been advised by the legal assessor that the previous finding had nothing to do with the present charges and should exercise no influence on their decision. It was said that the proceedings should have been stayed on the basis of the apparent bias. Held: The Board referred to the special systems established for regulating doctors' professional conduct. The GMC had no legal power to prevent publication of information in the public domain. He said that there was no dispute as to the test of "apparent bias" which was whether the circumstances "would lead a fair-minded and informed observer to conclude that there was a real possibility, or a real danger, the two being the same, that the tribunal was biased." Such an observer would be assumed to have knowledge of the GMC's "long and well-established system with statutory backing, operated by those selected and elected to the task, and supported by a comprehensive appeal system…". "Their Lordships feel they can safely say that there was no danger here of any prejudice to the doctor: this was a well-established quasi-professional tribunal which had been directed in plain terms to pay no attention to the previous conviction because it would give them no assistance, a direction reinforced by the fact that it dealt with events more than 20 years before. The experience their Lordships have of the jury system is that juries are faithful to their oath and abide by the instructions they are given. There are rare circumstances (and this case is not one) where the judge feels that the direction he is considering giving (for example to ignore some exceptionally prejudicial piece of evidence which they knew) might involve the jury in such 'mental gymnastics' before they could accept what loyalty to their oath required of them that the risk could not be taken, and the jury would have to be discharged. But here it is difficult to see how the appellant's conduct of 20 years ago could affect the fundamental point of credibility the committee here had to consider."
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Dr Narasinga Mukunda Rao vThe General Medical Council [2002] UKPC 65; [2003] Lloyd's Rep Med 602
9 Dec 2002
PC

Health Professions
PC (The Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC) The misconduct was a single incident. There was undoubted negligence but something more was required to constitute serious professional misconduct and to attach the stigma of such a finding to a doctor of some 25 years standing with an hitherto unblemished career. The court were far from satisfied that if properly advised the PCC would inevitably have arrived at the same conclusion.The integrity of the finding of serious professional misconduct is undermined and that the determination of the PCC that the appellant was guilty of serious professional misconduct is unsafe and should be set aside.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Fairburn (the Old Rectory Nursing Home, Barham, Ipswich) v National Care Standards Commission [2002] EWCST 0076(NC)
16 Dec 2002
CST

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Fairburn (the Old Rectory Nursing Home, Barham, Ipswich) v National Care Standards Commission [2002] EWCST 76(NC)
16 Dec 2002
CST

Health Professions

[ Bailii ]
 
Doctor Beynon and Partners v Commissioners of Customs and Excise Times, 15 January 2003; [2002] EWCA Civ 1870
20 Dec 2002
CA
Lord Justice Aldous Lord Justice Chadwick Mr Justice Munby
VAT, Health Professions
The appellants were doctors practicing far from a pharmacy. They themselves administered rather than dispensed drugs direct to their clients under the regulation. They appealed a finding that the supplies were exempt supplies, asserting instead that they were zero-rated. The NHS refused to make an allowance against VAT paid on drugs supplied to regulation 20 patients. Held: The judge had viewed the issue as one of fact. That was incorrect. The aim of the patient was to be diagnosed and then to receive treatment. In a general sense that was one supply, but in the context of this question, that was the wrong level of generality. Here there were two supplies, and the supply of the drug was zero-rated.
National Health Service (Pharmaceutical Services) Regulations 1992 (1992 No 662) 20 - Value Added Tax Act 1994 Sch8 Grp12 1A
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Quintavalle, Regina (on the Application of) v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority; Admn 20-Dec-2002 - [2002] EWHC 3000 (Admin); (2003) 70 BMLR 236; [2003] 2 All ER 105; [2003] 1 FCR 664
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.