Wray v General Osteopathic Council [2021] EWCA Civ 1940 (17 December 2021)

Wray v General Osteopathic Council [2021] EWCA Civ 1940 (17 December 2021)

Where a registered osteopath has been convicted of a criminal offence and given a conditional discharge, section 14(1) of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 prohibits reliance on the conviction itself in subsequent disciplinary proceedings. The General Osteopathic Council must proceed as a 'conduct case', alleging and proving the underlying facts said to amount to unacceptable professional conduct, without relying on the conviction as proof. The complaint must clearly specify the facts relied upon, and the registrant must be given a fair opportunity to admit, deny, or qualify those facts. Any previous admissions (such as a guilty plea) may be admissible but are not...

Citation
[2021] EWCA Civ 1940
Parties
Appellant/respondent: Elsworth Wray; Respondent/appellant: The General Osteopathic Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal (professional Discipline) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (administrative Court)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Unacceptable Professional Conduct (upc), Effect of Conditional Discharge, Procedural Fairness in Disciplinary Proceedings, Interpretation of Osteopaths Act 1993, Role of Admissions and Convictions in Professional Regulation
Professional Discipline Administrative Law Health Law Unacceptable Professional Conduct (upc) Effect of Conditional Discharge Procedural Fairness in Disciplinary Proceedings Interpretation of Osteopaths Act 1993 Role of Admissions and Convictions in Professional Regulation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elsworth Wray

Appellant/respondent

The General Osteopathic Council

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (professional Discipline) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (administrative Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a conditional discharge following a criminal conviction can be relied upon as a 'conviction' in professional disciplinary proceedings under the Osteopaths Act 1993
  2. 2 Whether the Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) can rely on the fact of conviction or must prove underlying facts in a 'conduct' case
  3. 3 What procedural safeguards and requirements apply to the formulation and amendment of complaints in professional discipline cases

Ratio Decidendi

Where a registered osteopath has been convicted of a criminal offence and given a conditional discharge, section 14(1) of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 prohibits reliance on the conviction itself in subsequent disciplinary proceedings. The General Osteopathic Council must proceed as a 'conduct case', alleging and proving the underlying facts said to amount to unacceptable professional conduct, without relying on the conviction as proof. The complaint must clearly specify the facts relied upon, and the registrant must be given a fair opportunity to admit, deny, or qualify those facts. Any previous admissions (such as a guilty plea) may be admissible but are not...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal by the General Osteopathic Council is dismissed.
  • The decision of Collins Rice J quashing the finding of unacceptable professional conduct and the admonishment is upheld.