Matthew Corrie Barrister
Matthew was called to the bar in 2006 and is a Barrister in the Professional Regulatory team based in our London office. Prior to joining Blake Morgan he practised in crime, employment, personal injury and professional regulation and so has a wealth of experience across a range of sectors, courts and tribunals. He prosecutes and defends across a range of regulators in cases involving allegations of sexual misconduct, dishonesty and complex clinical failings and deficient professional performance.
Main area of practice
Matthew now practises exclusively in professional discipline and regulation and is regularly instructed to appear at all hearings before Fitness to Practise Committees across a range of regulators. Matthew both prosecutes and defends and he has extensive experience of dealing with cases involving allegations of sexual misconduct, dishonesty and complex clinical failings.
Matthew is often instructed to appear hearings before the Fitness to Practise Committees and in the High Court by the General Dental Council, the General Optical Council and the General Pharmaceutical Council. Matthew also has significant experience presenting cases before the Health and Care Professions Council and defends across a range of regulators.
Articles by Matthew
The High Court holds that it does have jurisdiction, quashes decision not to find sexual motivation and remits case to MPTS in first review brought under provisions of section 40A of the Medical Act 1983.
The Court's conclusions in relation to the dishonesty are, put simply, a victory of common sense. More interestingly, and of wider application, was the way in which the Court approached the issue of providing treatment to friends
This decision serves as a reminder not only that fitness to practise committees must ensure that they take all relevant matters into account at the appropriate stage, but also that they must show that they have done so in their reasoning.
Related Knowledge & Resources
The High Court dismissed an appeal made by the appellant Doctor against a finding on a second review of a substantive order of current impairment and sanction of a 6-month suspension order.
The Respondent had appeared before the Medical Practitioners Tribunal ("the MPT") for dishonesty charges arising out of his conduct as a Locum Paediatric Registrar on 13 December 2014, when he was dealing with Patient A.