header-logo header-logo

Medical practitioner

11 October 2013
Issue: 7579 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Malik v General Medical Council [2013] All ER (D) 24 (Oct)

It was established law that under s 41A of the Medical Act 1983, where an interim orders panel were satisfied that it was necessary for protection of members of the public or was otherwise in the public interest for the registration of that person to be suspended, the panel might order, among other things, that the registration was to be suspended. The statute used the word “necessary” for the protection of members of the public. The other test was in the “public interest”. In order to justify the suspension it had to be at least highly desirable and necessary also to qualify the public interest test. Under s 41A(10) of the Act, a court might terminate the suspension. An application made under s 41A(10) was made on the basis that there was an extant order of suspension. The court would start from the proposition that the suspension was in place before deciding whether the position ought to be altered; and, as had been

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
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
In NLJ this week, Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre marks Pro Bono Week by urging lawyers to recognise the emotional toll of pro bono work
Can a lease legally last only days—or even hours? Professor Mark Pawlowski of the University of Greenwich explores the question in this week's NLJ
RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich
back-to-top-scroll