British Dental Association v General Dental Council

British Dental Association v General Dental Council

The consultation on the annual retention fee was unlawful due to a lack of transparency and failure to provide adequate information, preventing consultees from making informed and intelligent responses. The gap in information was fundamental, particularly regarding the assumptions behind the projected increase in fitness to practise hearings.

Parties
Claimant: British Dental Association; Defendant: General Dental Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment
Outcome
Permission granted; declaration that the consultation was unlawful.
Legal Topics
Consultation Process, Legitimate Expectation, Fee Setting, Transparency, Procedural Fairness
Administrative Law Regulatory Law Consultation Process Legitimate Expectation Fee Setting Transparency Procedural Fairness

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

British Dental Association

Claimant

General Dental Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the General Dental Council's consultation on the annual retention fee for dentists was lawful and transparent
  2. 2 Whether there was a duty to re-consult after changes in assumptions and data

Ratio Decidendi

The consultation on the annual retention fee was unlawful due to a lack of transparency and failure to provide adequate information, preventing consultees from making informed and intelligent responses. The gap in information was fundamental, particularly regarding the assumptions behind the projected increase in fitness to practise hearings.

Court Disposition

Permission granted; declaration that the consultation was unlawful.

Orders

  • Declaration that the annual retention fee consultation was unlawful
  • Further relief to be determined after submissions