A nurse was found guilty of misconduct. The Council sought to appeal the penalty, saying it was too lenient.
Held: The nurse had accessed explicit and offensive web-sites, and been cautioned. The council had the power to make such an application, but it was for the Council to establish that the penalty was unduly lenient. That had not been established here and the application was refused.
Judges:
Mr Justice Collins
Citations:
[2004] EWHC 585 (Admin), Times 08-Apr-2004
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Council for the Regulation of Healthcare Professionals v General Medical Council and Dr Solanke Admn 30-Apr-2004
The council appealed against what it said was a lenient sentence imposed on a doctor for malpractice.
Held: It was relevant to take account of the way criminal courts dealt with appeals against lenient sentences. The test in relation to an . .
Cited – Dr Giuseppe Ruscill, Council for the Regulation of Health Care Professionals v The General Medical Council and Another, The Council for the Regulation of Health Care Profesionals, The Nursing and Midwifery Council, Truscott CA 20-Oct-2004
The Council sought to refer to the High Court decisions to acquit the doctors of professional misconduct. The doctors argued that the power only existed for lenient sentences.
Held: The power to refer for undue leniency included the situation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Health Professions
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.195029