Blake Morgan PRT Commentary on the the Soni v General Medical Council Judgement

Posted on

Somewhat peculiarly this decision does not concern the substantive appeal which related to the Appellant's challenge to the findings of the Respondent's Fitness to Practise Panel. Instead it relates to that which transpired after the Appellant's appeal was allowed and the quashing of the Fitness to Practise Panel's determination. The grievances raised by the Appellant, who was a litigant in person will be of interest to regulators because it concerns delays in the removal from websites of material and/or links which relate to the disciplinary proceedings or findings and sanction which have been successfully appealed. It is clear that there is a real need on the part of regulators to act promptly as there could potentially be allegations of bad faith as occurred in this case. The other reason why this decision is of note is that it sets out the interplay between conduct and costs.

<< Back to June 2015 bulletin