DP v General Dental Council [2016] EWHC 3181 (Admin) (14 December 2016)

DP v General Dental Council [2016] EWHC 3181 (Admin) (14 December 2016)

Section 27A(11) of the Dentists Act 1984, as amended, confers a right from 13 April 2016 for registrants to seek review of warnings issued by the Investigating Committee within two years of the original determination, including those issued before 13 April 2016. The absence of limiting language or transitional...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 3181 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: DP; Defendant: General Dental Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed
Legal Topics
Statutory Interpretation, Retrospective Application of Legislation, Professional Regulation, Internal Review Procedures
Administrative Law Health Law Statutory Interpretation Retrospective Application of Legislation Professional Regulation Internal Review Procedures

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DP

Claimant

General Dental Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 27A(11) of the Dentists Act 1984, as amended, permits review of warnings issued by the Investigating Committee prior to 13 April 2016
  2. 2 Whether the GDC's guidance unlawfully restricted the scope of the new review power

Ratio Decidendi

Section 27A(11) of the Dentists Act 1984, as amended, confers a right from 13 April 2016 for registrants to seek review of warnings issued by the Investigating Committee within two years of the original determination, including those issued before 13 April 2016. The absence of limiting language or transitional provisions, combined with the remedial purpose of the amendment, supports this interpretation. The GDC's guidance unlawfully restricted the statutory review power.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed

Orders

  • The GDC's decision of 20 May 2016 refusing to list DP's application for review is quashed.
  • Paragraph 4(iii) of the GDC's Guidance is quashed.