Sarkar v The General Medical Council (GMC) [2020] EWHC 1896 (Admin) (20 July 2020)

Sarkar v The General Medical Council (GMC) [2020] EWHC 1896 (Admin) (20 July 2020)

The PSA was not the sole successful party in the Second Appeal, as both appeals were allowed on contrasting grounds and the GMC took a neutral stance. The GMC, as the statutory body responsible for the Tribunal, is analogous to an inferior tribunal in judicial review proceedings, and there is no basis to depart from the general rule that no order for costs should be made against it when it has not actively opposed the appeal. There was no evidence that the GMC acted unreasonably in not appealing the original decision, and the outcome of the remitted hearing supported the GMC's approach.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 1896 (Admin)
Parties
Appellant: Dr Chandranath Sarkar; Respondent (first Appeal) / First Respondent (second Appeal): The General Medical Council; Appellant (second Appeal): The Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Costs Determination Following Consent Order and Remittal
Outcome
No order as to costs in either appeal; PSA's application for costs against GMC dismissed.
Legal Topics
Costs, Appeals, Sanctions, Fitness to Practise, Statutory Interpretation
Administrative Law Medical Regulation Professional Discipline Costs Appeals Sanctions Fitness to Practise Statutory Interpretation

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Chandranath Sarkar

Appellant

The General Medical Council

Respondent (first Appeal) / First Respondent (second Appeal)

The Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care

Appellant (second Appeal)

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Costs Determination Following Consent Order and Remittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the General Medical Council should be ordered to pay the Professional Standards Authority's costs of the Second Appeal under CPR Part 44.2
  2. 2 Whether the PSA was the successful party in the Second Appeal for the purposes of costs
  3. 3 Whether the GMC's neutral stance and statutory role affect liability for costs

Ratio Decidendi

The PSA was not the sole successful party in the Second Appeal, as both appeals were allowed on contrasting grounds and the GMC took a neutral stance. The GMC, as the statutory body responsible for the Tribunal, is analogous to an inferior tribunal in judicial review proceedings, and there is no basis to depart from the general rule that no order for costs should be made against it when it has not actively opposed the appeal. There was no evidence that the GMC acted unreasonably in not appealing the original decision, and the outcome of the remitted hearing supported the GMC's approach.

Court Disposition

No order as to costs in either appeal; PSA's application for costs against GMC dismissed.

Orders

  • No order for costs in the First Appeal.
  • PSA's application for costs against the GMC in the Second Appeal dismissed.