General Medical Council, R (on the application of) v George
A four-month extension of Dr George's suspension is proportionate, balancing the need to protect the public and Dr George's interests, given the history of delays and the scheduled Fitness to Practise Panel hearing. Costs are awarded to the GMC as Dr George did not consent to the extension and the GMC succeeded in their application.
- Parties
- Claimant: General Medical Council; Defendant: Dr George
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 28 February 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review Application / Hearing of Application to Extend Interim Suspension
- Outcome
- Application granted in part
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Interim Suspension, Fitness to Practise, Procedural Fairness, Costs
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
General Medical Council
Claimant
Dr George
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Hearing of Application to Extend Interim Suspension
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether to extend Dr George's suspension and for what period
- 2 Whether costs should be awarded against Dr George
Ratio Decidendi
A four-month extension of Dr George's suspension is proportionate, balancing the need to protect the public and Dr George's interests, given the history of delays and the scheduled Fitness to Practise Panel hearing. Costs are awarded to the GMC as Dr George did not consent to the extension and the GMC succeeded in their application.
Court Disposition
Application granted in part
Orders
- Dr George's suspension extended for four months from the date of the order
- Dr George to pay the GMC's costs of the application, to be assessed if not agreed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment