The Professional Standards Authority v The General Chiropractic Council & Anor [2014] EWHC 2190 (Admin) (16 July 2014)

The Professional Standards Authority v The General Chiropractic Council & Anor [2014] EWHC 2190 (Admin) (16 July 2014)

The failure to refer allegations of dishonesty to the Professional Conduct Committee was a serious procedural error, and the sanction imposed was unduly lenient due to the lack of a review mechanism and the registrant's lack of insight and risk of repetition. The case must be remitted for a full re-hearing by a fresh panel.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 2190 (Admin)
Parties
Appellant: The Professional Standards Authority; First Respondent: The General Chiropractic Council; Second Respondent: Cameron Briggs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Statutory Appeal Under Section 29 of the National Health Service Reform and Health Care Professions Act 2002 / High Court Appeal From Professional Conduct Committee Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; case remitted for re-hearing
Legal Topics
Professional Misconduct, Sanctions, Dishonesty in Professional Regulation, Procedural Fairness, Adequacy of Reasons
Administrative Law Professional Regulation Health Law Professional Misconduct Sanctions Dishonesty in Professional Regulation Procedural Fairness Adequacy of Reasons

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Professional Standards Authority

Appellant

The General Chiropractic Council

First Respondent

Cameron Briggs

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Statutory Appeal Under Section 29 of the National Health Service Reform and Health Care Professions Act 2002 / High Court Appeal From Professional Conduct Committee Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Professional Conduct Committee erred by failing to bring charges of dishonesty against Mr Briggs
  2. 2 Whether the sanction imposed was unduly lenient
  3. 3 Whether the Committee failed to give adequate reasons for its decision

Ratio Decidendi

The failure to refer allegations of dishonesty to the Professional Conduct Committee was a serious procedural error, and the sanction imposed was unduly lenient due to the lack of a review mechanism and the registrant's lack of insight and risk of repetition. The case must be remitted for a full re-hearing by a fresh panel.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; case remitted for re-hearing

Orders

  • Case remitted to a fresh panel of the Professional Conduct Committee for a full re-hearing on all grounds, including additional allegations of dishonesty.