Christopher Pataky Barrister and Senior Associate
Chris is a senior associate and barrister within the Professional Regulatory team, based in London.
Main area of practice
Currently undertakes advocacy before professional regulatory tribunals and fitness to practise investigations for a range of regulators. Experience of appeals before the High Court and undertaking applications to extend interim suspension orders before the High Court.
- Conducting advocacy before tribunals in a wide range of cases, including complex and high profile matters.
- Frequently appeared in the High Court in relation to applications to extend interim orders.
- Acted for the NMC in the appeals of Ige v The Nursing and Midwifery Council  EWHC 3721 (Admin), and more recently Kibe v The Nursing and Midwifery Council  EWHC 1402 (Admin). Within both cases, all grounds of appeal were successfully defended. More recently he acted for the General Dental Council in the case of Davey v The General Dental Council  WL 6757832 (Admin).
Articles by Christopher
This was an appeal by the General Medical Council (GMC) against the decision of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal (MPT) to restore the Respondent to the Register of medical practitioners which is maintained by the Appellant.
The Appellant (an optometrist) successfully appealed against a decision of the Fitness to Practise Committee (FTPC) to (1) find him currently impaired and (2) to erase him from the register of optometrists.
This was an appeal in respect of the factual determination which had been made by the Conduct and Competence Committee during the course of a conduct hearing. The hearing began in April 2015 before resuming and concluding in July 2015.
Related Knowledge & Resources
An appeal by the Professional Standards for Health and Social Care against the decision of the NMC not to pursue allegations that a Registrant was responsible for non-accidental injuries to her son and/or a failure to protect Baby A from harm.
The Divisional Court allowed the GMC’s appeal against the decision of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal (“MPT”) to suspend Dr Bawa-Garba’s registration for 12 months and substituted the sanction of erasure from the Medical Register.
This case concerns an appeal against the Respondent SRA’s Adjudication Panel, on the grounds that the panel’s finding of dishonesty were based upon a two-stage test of dishonesty, namely the objective and subjective test.