header-logo header-logo

An alternative prescription

20 October 2011 / Stewart Duffy
Issue: 7486 / Categories: Features , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

Stewart Duffy examines the standard of proof before regulators of the healthcare professions

Prior to 2008, the major statutory regulators of the healthcare professions had applied the criminal standard of proof in determining allegations of misconduct against practitioners. They had done so as a matter of custom and practice in a statutory vacuum. In July 2008 Parliament passed the Health and Social Care Act 2008, s 112 of which requires disciplinary panels of the General Medical Council (GMC), General Dental Council (GDC), Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) and General Optical Council (GOC) to apply the standard of proof which “is that applicable in civil proceedings” (the new rule). That was the same language which the GMC had adopted several months earlier when it amended its Fitness to Practise Procedure rules.

The new rule could easily have been expressed in different terms. The statutory rules governing police disciplinaries and school exclusion decisions expressly require facts to be proved “on the balance of probabilities”. That was not the formula adopted by Parliament for the healthcare regulators. Nonetheless,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll