GDC Victorious at Court of Appeal
- Details
- Published: Friday, 07 February 2025 09:59
- Written by Peter Ingle
- Hits: 3322
After a run of lost legal cases the GDC has scored a decisive victory at The Court of Appeal. The case considered the perceived ‘doubling up‘ of sanctions involving suspensions.
A registrant under Fitness to Practice (FtP) investigation had been subject to an immediate suspension. These are imposed at a comparatively early stage of the FtP process, before a case has been heard. When the FtP hearing took place they were given a nine month (substantive) suspension.
The registrant had argued that by the time their case was heard, they had already been suspended for over nine months while the investigation ran its course.
Following the registrant’s appeal, in an order dated 28 December 2023, the judge quashed the direction for a 9 months’ suspension under section 27B(6)(b) of the 1984 dentists Act, and substituted for it a direction that the respondent be suspended for a total period of 9 months, in which the duration of the suspension already served under the immediate suspension order would be deducted. The judge treated the period of substantive suspension and the period of immediate suspension as one continuous period of suspension, which he stated should be subject to an aggregate upper limit of 12 months. This judgement and the GDC’s decision to appeal it were reported in GDPUK .
The GDC were not happy with this decision and conducted an appeal, which they have now won.
In a news item on the GDC website, the Council announced: “The Court of Appeal has provided welcome clarity on the interpretation of how immediate orders and substantive sanctions interact under the Dentists Act 1984.”
The GDC see this as confirmation that there is no basis for aggregating the immediate and substantive suspensions and quote the judgement which described them as, “clearly different.”
The GDC add that this is in line with previous interpretation of the legislation by the GDC and other healthcare regulators.
In conclusion, the GDC say: “The substantive sanction, immediate order and/or any directions are a matter for the independent Practice Committees to determine in each case as they consider appropriate.”
The persistent delays in dealing with FtP cases have long been an issue and the GDC has been criticised over these by the Professional Standards Authority.
The effect of this judgement would appear to be that these delays will remain a ‘bonus’ punishment for registrants.
The General Dental Council v Nabeel Aga - Find Case Law - The National Archives
You need to be logged in to leave comments.
Report
My comments