header-logo header-logo

Medical practitioner

04 October 2013
Issue: 7578 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

R (on the application of D) v General Medical Council [2013] EWHC 2839 (Admin), [2013] All ER (D) 202 (Sep)

The five-year rule under r 4(5) of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules 2004 (SI 2004/2608) provided a distinct and free-standing safeguard which sets a general prohibition against the pursuit of long-delayed complaints. It provided only for very limited, “exceptional”, circumstances in which such complaints might proceed. In the event of a wrong decision there was no satisfactory remedy later in the proceedings. The registrar had to be satisfied that there were circumstances of the case which could fairly be described as “exceptional circumstances” and that proceeding with the case was in the public interest, in those exceptional circumstances. Although a reasonable amount of time should be allowed to pursue complaints, the policy underlying r 4(5) was that practitioners should not be pursued by stale complaints. The registrar’s decision had to identify the public interest and the exceptional circumstances pertinent to the particular allegations under consideration.

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

Birketts—trainee cohort

Birketts—trainee cohort

Firm welcomes new cohort of 29 trainee solicitors for 2025

Keoghs—four appointments

Keoghs—four appointments

Four partner hires expand legal expertise in Scotland and Northern Ireland

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Real estate team in Yorkshire welcomes new partner

NEWS
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
The Court of Protection has ruled in Macpherson v Sunderland City Council that capacity must be presumed unless clearly rebutted. In this week's NLJ, Sam Karim KC and Sophie Hurst of Kings Chambers dissect the judgment and set out practical guidance for advisers faced with issues relating to retrospective capacity and/or assessments without an examination
Delays and dysfunction continue to mount in the county court, as revealed in a scathing Justice Committee report and under discussion this week by NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School. Bulk claims—especially from private parking firms—are overwhelming the system, with 8,000 cases filed weekly
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
back-to-top-scroll