Contact our offices
Make an enquiry
How can we help?
Our specialist solicitors have been defending healthcare professionals for over a decade. In that time we have defended hundreds of practitioners and we have an excellent track record of protecting our clients' careers and reputations.
We are a leading firm in medical defence and we pride ourselves on achieving the best possible results for our clients. Our expert team deal with a wide range of cases, including GMC investigations, registration issues, fitness to practise proceedings, allegations of poor professional competence, allegations of serious misconduct and concerns regarding the health of practitioners.
If you are facing investigation by the GMC or you have been referred to a hearing before the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS), it is important that you seek specialist advice as soon as possible.
For immediate confidential advice from one of our specialist GMC lawyers call 0161 696 6250.
Specialist GMC solicitors
Our GMC lawyers understand the needs and anxieties of doctors facing serious allegations and whose practice and livelihood is at risk. We recognise the need for urgent, specialist advice from lawyers with genuine experience of defending similar cases. We act for clients nationwide and we also regularly act for clients who are based overseas but are registered with the GMC. We act for doctors at all levels of seniority and we act for clients working in NHS settings and in private practice.
Our lawyers have experience of representing doctors in relation to the full range of regulatory matters, including:
Our expertise in this area is wide-ranging and we regularly deal with the full range of fitness to practise cases. You can be assured that whatever issue you face, our team will have experience of dealing with similar issues. Our experience includes dealing with the following matters:
In addition to dealing with GMC investigations and fitness to practise proceedings, we also assist with doctors with applications for registration, specialist registration and sub-speciality recognition.
At Stephensons, our team of specialist GMC lawyers has extensive experience in handling all aspects of GMC investigations and Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) hearings. Our deep understanding of the regulatory landscape allows us to provide robust and effective legal representation, ensuring that your professional interests are meticulously protected.
We offer a wide range of services including advising on regulatory compliance, preparing responses to GMC inquiries, and representing clients at interim orders and fitness to practise hearings.
Our lawyers are adept at navigating complex cases involving serious clinical incidents, surgical errors, and allegations of dishonesty or misconduct.
Our track record speaks for itself. We have successfully defended numerous healthcare professionals, achieving favourable outcomes such as the dismissal of allegations and minimal sanctions. Our strategic approach focuses on early resolution where possible, often concluding matters swiftly to reduce the stress and uncertainty for our clients.
We understand the personal and professional impact that a GMC investigation can have. Our dedicated team works closely with each client, providing tailored advice and support throughout the process. We strive to achieve the best possible outcome, whether through detailed responses during the investigation stage or rigorous defence at hearings.
Stephensons is recommended in the Legal 500 for our professional disciplinary work, reflecting our standing as a leading law firm in this field. Our commitment to excellence and client care ensures that you receive the highest standard of legal representation.
For confidential advice and expert representation, contact our specialist GMC lawyers today.
If you are under investigation by the General Medical Council or you have been referred to a hearing before the MPTS, please contact our specialist solicitors without delay either by calling us on 0161 696 6250 or by completing our online enquiry form.
Our lawyers acted for a private cosmetic surgeon facing a complaint from a patient. The patient raised wide-ranging allegations about our client’s conduct. Our client maintained that the complaint was vexatious and unfounded. We assisted our client with a number of responses to the GMC and we produced evidence which significantly undermined the complainant’s account. This resulted in the GMC’s Case Examiners closing the investigation with no further action.
Our lawyers acted for a doctor referred to the GMC in relation to several allegations ranging from poor clinical performance to dishonesty. We made detailed written submissions at the Rule 7 Stage maintaining that there was no realistic prospect of a finding that our client’s fitness to practise was impaired. The case examiners concluded the case with no further action.
Our solicitors acted for a doctor accused of dishonesty following allegations of submitting inaccurate timesheets. Written submissions were made to the case examiners, dealing with evidential issues and matters concerning our client’s fitness to practise. Following this, the GMC proposed to conclude the case with a warning. Our client did not wish to accept a warning and further written submissions were made. These were accepted by the case examiners and the case was closed with advice.
We acted for a doctor accused of dishonesty in relation to a number of job applications. It transpired that these issues had arisen following complaints made by one of our client’s former colleagues following a breakdown in their relationship. We carried out a careful analysis of the evidence and we were able to demonstrate that the concerns were unfounded. The GMC’s Case Examiners accepted our submissions and closed the case with no further action.
Our solicitors acted for a doctor facing investigation following a complaint by a private patient regarding an elective cosmetic procedure. The GMC instructed an expert witness who was highly critical of our client. We made detailed written submissions which challenged the expert's findings. Following this the investigation was closed with no further action.
Our lawyers represented a doctor facing multiple complaints of financial misconduct and dishonesty. We represented our client at a number of Interim Orders Panel hearings and a meeting at the GMC’s offices to discuss the allegations. Following this, written submissions were made at the Rule 7 stage which resulted in the allegations of dishonesty being withdrawn. The case was concluded with a warning.
Our lawyers acted for a doctor referred to the GMC following a serious clinical error which contributed to the death of a patient. Our client accepted having made a diagnostic error and made full and frank admissions to the GMC. Detailed written submissions were made at the Rule 7 stage setting out our client’s reflection on the incident and outlining a programme of training which had been completed in order to remediate matters. The case was concluded with a warning.
Our solicitors advised a doctor facing investigation following an application for specialist registration. It was alleged that aspects of the application were dishonest. We assisted our client in preparing a detailed response at the outset of the investigation which clarified the issues which had been raised. The investigation was closed by the GMC and no action was taken against our client.
We acted for a GP in a long-running and complex case involving a number of allegations of dishonesty, which were denied by our client. Following a review of the evidence we made submissions about the admissibility of key items of evidence relied upon by the GMC. Those submissions were accepted by the MPTS and the evidence was dismissed, resulting in a number of allegations being withdrawn. Our client gave evidence in relation to another allegation of dishonesty and was found to be a credible witness. The allegation was found not proven and no action was taken against our client’s registration.
We acted for a consultant who was accused of sexual misconduct by a colleague. The allegations were denied and a hearing took place before the MPTS. Our client had been consistent throughout all stages of the proceedings and was found to be a credible witness. However we were able to highlight a number of inconsistencies in the complainant’s account. The MPTS found the allegations not proved and no action was taken against our client.
Our solicitors acted for a doctor referred to a fitness to practice hearing before the MPTS facing wide-ranging allegations. These included competence allegations, issues with regard to communications with colleagues and allegations of dishonesty. Some of the allegations were admitted but most were denied. The allegations which were denied were successfully defended at the hearing. This included allegations of dishonesty. Detailed mitigation was presented in relation to those allegations which were admitted. The Tribunal found that our client’s fitness to practise was not impaired and as such no action was taken.
We acted for a doctor who was referred to the MPTS following a serious clinical incident which occurred during a surgical procedure. Our client admitted the allegations and we presented extensive evidence of reflection and remediation. The Tribunal found that our client’s fitness to practise was not impaired, and no action was taken.
We acted for a doctor who was referred to the MPTS following convictions for a number of serious criminal convictions. Our client admitted that their fitness to practise was currently impaired in light of those convictions, and the focus of the hearing was on the question of sanction. Detailed evidence of mitigation and reflection was prepared and provided to the Tribunal. The Tribunal did not make an order of erasure and instead imposed a period of suspension. This suspension was subsequently reviewed by the MPTS and our client was permitted to return to unrestricted practice.
Our lawyers acted for a doctor pursuing an application for restoration to the Medical Register. Our client had been erased at an earlier hearing following findings of dishonesty. We assisted our client in the preparation of a detailed reflective statement and supporting documents. The Tribunal was satisfied that our client had developed full insight and the application for restoration was granted.
The General Medical Council (GMC) is the regulatory body for doctors in the UK. It sets standards for medical education, training, and practice, ensuring doctors maintain high professional and ethical standards. The GMC also maintains a register of qualified doctors and oversees fitness to practise proceedings to protect patient safety and uphold public confidence in the medical profession.
The GMC investigates a variety of concerns regarding doctors' fitness to practise. These include:
Misconduct: behaviour that is unethical or unprofessional, such as breaches of patient confidentiality or inappropriate relationships with patients.
Poor performance: substandard clinical practice, which may include diagnostic errors, inadequate patient care, or failure to maintain medical knowledge.
Criminal convictions or cautions: any criminal activity that raises questions about a doctor’s ability to practise safely and ethically.
Health issues: physical or mental health conditions that may impair a doctor’s ability to provide safe care.
Language proficiency: insufficient knowledge of English, which could affect communication and patient care.
Determinations by other regulatory bodies: findings by other professional bodies that suggest a doctor’s fitness to practise may be impaired.
These investigations are aimed at ensuring the safety and well-being of patients and maintaining trust in the medical profession
A GMC investigation involves several detailed stages to assess whether a doctor's fitness to practise is impaired. The process typically begins when a concern is raised about a doctor's conduct or performance. This can come from various sources such as patients, employers, or other healthcare professionals.
Initial assessment
Once a complaint is received, the GMC conducts an initial assessment to determine if the issue warrants a full investigation. If the concern is deemed serious enough, the case progresses to a formal inquiry.
Notification and response
The doctor in question is notified about the investigation and given an opportunity to respond to the allegations. It's crucial at this stage for the doctor to seek legal advice and provide a comprehensive response. Engaging with the GMC early can sometimes lead to a quicker resolution.
Evidence gathering
The GMC then gathers evidence, which may include medical records, witness statements, and expert opinions. They may also contact the doctor’s employer for additional information. If the case involves serious allegations such as misconduct or poor performance, the GMC might refer the matter to the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) for an interim orders tribunal. This tribunal can impose temporary restrictions on the doctor's practice while the investigation continues.
Decision making
After collecting all necessary evidence, senior decision-makers at the GMC review the case. They can decide to:
- Close the case with no further action.
- Issue a warning.
- Agree on undertakings with the doctor to address the issues.
- Refer the case to a fitness to practise panel at the MPTS.
Fitness to practise hearing
If referred to the MPTS, a formal hearing is conducted where both the GMC and the doctor present their cases. The tribunal then decides whether the doctor's fitness to practise is impaired and determines appropriate sanctions if necessary. These can range from conditions on practice to suspension or erasure from the medical register.
Monitoring and compliance
If sanctions are imposed, the GMC monitors the doctor’s compliance. This may involve regular assessments and reports from supervisors. If the doctor fails to comply, the case could be referred back to the MPTS for further action.
Throughout this process, it is essential for doctors to seek specialist legal advice to navigate the complexities of the investigation and protect their professional interests.
A GMC tribunal is a formal hearing conducted by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS), an independent body from the General Medical Council (GMC). The tribunal assesses allegations against doctors regarding their fitness to practise. It decides whether a doctor's ability to practise is impaired and, if so, what sanctions should be applied.
These can range from imposing conditions on their practice to suspension or even removal from the medical register. The tribunal aims to protect patient safety and maintain public confidence in the medical profession.
Yes, you can appeal a GMC decision. Appeals can be made to the High Court if you believe the decision is unjust or the process was flawed.
The GMC considers misconduct to be unethical or inappropriate behaviour, such as breaches of patient confidentiality, dishonesty, improper relationships with patients, and actions that undermine public trust in the medical profession.
loading staff
Food Law Code of Practice (England): what businesses need to know in 2025
The Food Law Code of Practice (the “Code”) sets out how local authorities and other enforcement bodies should carry out official food law controls in England. It dictates how inspections, enforcement action and prosecutions are approached. ...
Navigating the CQC factual accuracy process: what providers need to know
If you’re a provider who has recently been assessed by the Care Quality Commission (CQC), you may be feeling uncertain about what comes next. As specialist CQC solicitors , we understand how complex and time-sensitive this process can be. This short...
staff reorder - professional discipline
