Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The High Court allowed the GMC’s appeal against a no-impairment decision in Dr Sathyanath’s case, quashing findings on clinical indication and sexual motivation.
The Court of Appeal held that Dr Eskander’s statutory appeal was brought in time when her appellant’s notice was delivered to the court, despite fee non-payment.
The GMC does not owe a common law duty of care to doctors under investigation regarding timing, manner, or content of notification, as such a duty would be inconsistent with its statutory obligations to protect the public and conduct investigations. The operational duty under Article 2 ECHR does not arise in the context of regulatory investigations, as the circumstances do not amount to 'well-defined circumstances' and the GMC did not have actual or constructive knowledge of a real and immediate risk to life. Both claims are bound to fail and are struck out or summarily dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Tribunal's findings of fact and sanction were based on a thorough, holistic evidential analysis, correctly applied legal principles, and were reasonably open to it; persistent dishonesty by Dr Demanya, including falsification and concealment of medical records and false testimony, rendered erasure necessary to maintain public confidence and professional standards.
Source excerpt
Myhill v General Medical Council [2025] EWHC 1744 (Admin) (09 July 2025)
High Court dismissed Dr Myhill’s appeal against a GMC review decision upholding a 12-month suspension for misconduct and lack of insight.
This is an exceptional case where the appellant personally did all he could to bring the appeal in time, and the delay was caused solely by his solicitors' procedural error. Strict application of the statutory time limit would unjustly impair the appellant's right of access to the court under Article 6 ECHR. An extension of time is granted to 28 April 2025.
Source excerpt
El-Tawil v Larrinaga & Ors [2025] EWHC 1288 (KB) (23 May 2025)
The High Court dismissed Dr El-Tawil’s application to set aside the strike-out of his appeal, holding the appeal was properly struck out for non-compliance and had no real prospect of success.
Thilliainayagam v General Medical Council [2025] EWHC 1253 (Admin) (16 May 2025)
The High Court granted Dr Thillainayagam an extension of time to appeal a GMC-related MPTS decision, holding that solicitor error and wrong-court filing would otherwise unfairly defeat access to appeal.
The High Court quashed a GMC Tribunal suspension decision, holding it was not properly reasoned because the alleged inconsistencies in Dr Sengupta’s evidence were not identified.
The court declined to make the order requiring notice to the parties before non-party access to court documents, finding that the existing CPR 5.4C(2) permission mechanism provides sufficient protection for privacy and confidentiality. The proposed order would be a disproportionate and unnecessary restriction on open justice, given the absence of highly sensitive material and the robust control already available to the court.
Source excerpt
Explore more
