Elsworth Wray v The General Osteopathic Council

Elsworth Wray v The General Osteopathic Council

The Court of Appeal held that, although the High Court judge erred in her analysis of the PCC's procedure, she was entitled to find, on a rehearing, that the respondent's conduct did not amount to Unacceptable Professional Conduct (UPC) in all the circumstances. The PCC was correct to treat the case as one relating to conduct, not conviction, and to rely on the respondent's admissions, but the judge was entitled to conclude that the threshold for UPC was not met.

Parties
Respondent: Elsworth Wray; Appellant: The General Osteopathic Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal (professional Discipline) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (administrative Court)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court decision upheld
Legal Topics
Unacceptable Professional Conduct (upc), Effect of Conditional Discharge, Procedural Fairness in Disciplinary Proceedings, Admissibility of Criminal Conviction in Professional Regulation, Interpretation of S.14 Powers of Criminal Courts (sentencing) Act 2000
Professional Discipline Administrative Law Criminal Law Unacceptable Professional Conduct (upc) Effect of Conditional Discharge Procedural Fairness in Disciplinary Proceedings Admissibility of Criminal Conviction in Professional Regulation Interpretation of S.14 Powers of Criminal Courts (sentencing) Act 2000

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elsworth Wray

Respondent

The General Osteopathic Council

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (professional Discipline) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (administrative Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a professional disciplinary committee can rely on facts underlying a criminal conviction resulting in a conditional discharge in a case relating to conduct, not conviction
  2. 2 Whether the committee followed fair and proper procedure under the Osteopaths Act 1993 and associated rules
  3. 3 Whether the facts admitted or proved amounted to Unacceptable Professional Conduct (UPC)

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that, although the High Court judge erred in her analysis of the PCC's procedure, she was entitled to find, on a rehearing, that the respondent's conduct did not amount to Unacceptable Professional Conduct (UPC) in all the circumstances. The PCC was correct to treat the case as one relating to conduct, not conviction, and to rely on the respondent's admissions, but the judge was entitled to conclude that the threshold for UPC was not met.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court decision upheld

Orders

  • The finding of Unacceptable Professional Conduct (UPC) and the admonishment imposed by the Professional Conduct Committee are quashed.
  • No further action against the respondent.