Malik v General Medical Council

Malik v General Medical Council

On the evidence, there is no real risk to patients from lack of clinical competence, and no ongoing probity concerns after the relevant period. Suspension cannot be justified as necessary for protection of the public or in the public interest. The interim suspension is therefore wrong and must be terminated.

Parties
Claimant: Dr Malik; Defendant: General Medical Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 August 2013
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment
Outcome
suspension terminated
Legal Topics
Interim Suspension, Fitness to Practise, Probity, Public Interest, Proportionality
Medical Law Administrative Law Interim Suspension Fitness to Practise Probity Public Interest Proportionality

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

Parties

Dr Malik

Claimant

General Medical Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the interim suspension of Dr Malik should be continued under section 41A(1) of the Medical Act 1983
  2. 2 Whether suspension is necessary for the protection of the public or otherwise in the public interest
  3. 3 Whether the probity concerns justify suspension absent clinical competence issues

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence, there is no real risk to patients from lack of clinical competence, and no ongoing probity concerns after the relevant period. Suspension cannot be justified as necessary for protection of the public or in the public interest. The interim suspension is therefore wrong and must be terminated.

Court Disposition

suspension terminated

Orders

  • Interim suspension of Dr Malik is terminated.
  • Costs awarded to claimant in the sum of £8,750 inclusive of VAT.