The Professional Standards Authority v The Nursing and Midwifery Council & Anor [2026] EWHC 637 (Admin) (18 March 2026)

The Professional Standards Authority v The Nursing and Midwifery Council & Anor [2026] EWHC 637 (Admin) (18 March 2026)

The NMC's failure to secure attendance of key witnesses and present material evidence constituted a serious procedural irregularity, rendering the Panel's decision unjust. The Panel's approach to 'half-time' submissions was legally flawed, failing to consider all evidence and the proper test for reasonable belief in consent. These errors required the Panel's decision to be quashed and the case remitted for fresh consideration.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 637 (Admin)
Parties
Appellant: The Professional Standards Authority; First Respondent: The Nursing and Midwifery Council; Second Respondent: Kwabena Ntow
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 March 2026
Procedural Posture
Statutory Appeal Under S.29 National Health Service Reform and Health Care Professions Act 2002 / Appeal From Fitness to Practise Committee Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Panel's decision quashed; case remitted for fresh consideration by a differently constituted panel.
Legal Topics
Procedural Irregularity, Fitness to Practise, Misconduct, Consent in Sexual Offences, Appeal Standards
Administrative Law Professional Discipline Health Law Procedural Irregularity Fitness to Practise Misconduct Consent in Sexual Offences Appeal Standards

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 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Professional Standards Authority

Appellant

The Nursing and Midwifery Council

First Respondent

Kwabena Ntow

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Statutory Appeal Under S.29 National Health Service Reform and Health Care Professions Act 2002 / Appeal From Fitness to Practise Committee Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether procedural irregularities by the NMC amounted to a serious procedural irregularity justifying quashing the decision
  2. 2 Whether the Panel's approach to 'half-time' submissions and findings on consent and reasonable belief was legally flawed
  3. 3 Whether the Panel's findings on impairment were sustainable

Ratio Decidendi

The NMC's failure to secure attendance of key witnesses and present material evidence constituted a serious procedural irregularity, rendering the Panel's decision unjust. The Panel's approach to 'half-time' submissions was legally flawed, failing to consider all evidence and the proper test for reasonable belief in consent. These errors required the Panel's decision to be quashed and the case remitted for fresh consideration.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Panel's decision quashed; case remitted for fresh consideration by a differently constituted panel.

Orders

  • Panel's decision of 6 June 2025 quashed
  • Case remitted to a differently constituted panel for fresh consideration