This is the latest in a series of briefings on the Fitness to Practise investigations process. The rules of evidence have become gradually more relaxed over the decades. Complex rules such as the hearsay rule and its even more complicated exceptions…
- Please select a briefing
- Evidence – the basis of admissibility
- The regulator’s power to require disclosure of information in Fitness to Practise investigations
- Practical observations about the burden and standard of proof – post Kuzmin
- How is oral evidence dealt with at Fitness to Practise hearings?
- Fitness to practise hearings - Who are the panel?
- Fitness to Practise investigations - what are undertakings?
- Fitness to Practise - Warnings and their effect
- What is ‘Advice’ and what is its significance?
- Is there a case to answer? The real prospect test
- Tribunal’s reliance on “twin fallacies” results in quashing of direction for erasure
- The filtering stage of the Fitness to Practise process - Case Examiners/Investigating Committees
- The duty to co-operate with Fitness to Practise investigations
- The duty of healthcare professionals to self-report convictions and cautions
- When health is a fitness to practise issue - adverse health
- Fitness to Practise - what is current impairment?
- How regulators conduct fitness to practise investigations
- Alleging sexual motivation in regulatory/disciplinary proceedings – new High Court guidance
- CQC Inspections update
- A new form of Inquest?
- COVID Challenges in Dentistry: Consent to Treatment
- Professional Indemnity for Healthcare Professionals
- NHS Dentistry – Resumption of service but not as usual
- It wasn’t written down but it did happen
- Coroner's Inquests and investigations into Covid-19 deaths in the workplace.
- Interim Orders - is a dental care professional’s right to privacy less important than a doctor's?
- A New Legal Duty for Clinicians
- General Medical Council - review of fitness to practise cases in the face of coronavirus
- Gross negligence manslaughter- Tolerating risk in the era of coronavirus
- Inquests: The Coronavirus Act 2020 and the scrutiny dilemma
- Covid-19 - Chief Coroner's Guidance on Post-Mortem Examinations during the Pandemic
- Updated guidance on Inquests during Covid-19 crisis
- Court of Protection Practice in light of Covid-19
- Ethical principles to underpin decisions in adult social care
- Covid-19. Cross sector assistance and protection for healthcare professionals
- Regulators’ statement to former healthcare professionals in response to the coronavirus crisis
- The Paterson Inquiry - Do doctors face an increased prospect of exclusion from work?
- 'Shadow Consultations' - why they are best avoided
- Police Investigations - the uncertainty of RUI
- Warnings given at fitness to practice investigations – should you challenge them?
- Notification of Deaths Regulations 2019 – A unified approach
- Are you facilitating your patients’ autonomy? Mordel v Royal Berkshire and the objective of informed consent
- Justice in Wales for the People of Wales: commission report
- Personal or Professional Misconduct? A shrinking role for MHPS
- The Supreme Court’s Judgment on the Limits of the Exercise of Parental Responsibility
- The Right to be Forgotten - Rounds 2 and 3
- Welsh Assembly Review: Petition to Make Mental Health Services More Accessible
- PI discount rate reset: A fair and balanced approach?
- Government confirms intended reforms of regulation for healthcare professionals
- Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: The GMC & BAME healthcare professionals
- The Pitfalls of Annual Renewal for Dentists and DCPs
- Independent Review of Gross Negligence Manslaughter - An Insider's Perspective
The precise nature of a regulator’s powers will be determined by the relevant statute establishing that regulator. Most regulators have the power to require a Registrant who is the subject of investigation to provide details of the indemnity cover and…
The regulator always bears the burden of proving allegations of misconduct or deficient professional performance. In conviction cases the certificate of conviction is usually deemed conclusive proof of the conviction. It is now well settled that the standard of proof which…
It is now common practice for witnesses who are to give evidence at an FTP to provide a written witness statement in advance of the hearing. That statement should set out the witnesses’ account of the relevant events. At the hearing…
The precise make up of fitness to practise panels varies between regulators but there is some commonality of approach. Such panels typically include at least one lay member and at least one member from the same profession as the defendant…
Where restrictions are imposed on a professional’s registration by their regulator, they are referred to as Conditions, or Conditions of practice. Many regulators operate a facility to agree restrictions with a Registrant without the need for a fitness to practise…
We deal with the status of advice in our previous briefings in this series. Warnings are a step up the ladder in terms of the seriousness of response from a regulator. Warnings are most commonly issued when the relevant decision-maker determines…
This article is part of our series about the Fitness to Practise investigations process. When a fitness to practise investigation is closed at the filtering stage, without the need for referral to a full fitness to practise hearing, it is relatively…
This article is part of a series of briefings on the Fitness to Practice process. The real prospect test is applied at the filtering stage of the fitness to practise process to determine whether allegations ought to be referred to a…
The case of Khan v GMC serves as a reminder for healthcare professionals of how complex and lengthy proceedings, in numerous tribunals, can arise from the same factual allegations. It also serves as a warning for tribunals of the dangers…