Professional discipline case studies

Stephensons has gained an excellent reputation for defending healthcare professionals and we pride ourselves on achieving the best possible results for our clients. Our team has specialist experience of dealing with a wide range of cases before the main healthcare regulators. 

Many of our cases are concluded at the investigation stage, therefore avoiding the need for fitness to practise hearings. The following cases provide a brief overview of our experience in this area.

If you are under investigation by your regulator or you have been called to a hearing, please contact our specialist fitness to practise lawyers on 0203 816 9274 without delay.

loading staff

General Medical Council

  • Our lawyers acted for a Doctor facing investigation following a complaint by a private patient regarding a cosmetic procedure. The GMC instructed an expert witness who was highly critical of our client. Submissions were made which challenged the expert's findings. Following this the investigation was closed with no further action.
  • Our lawyers acted for a Doctor accused of dishonesty following allegations of submitting inaccurate timesheets. Written submissions were made to the Case Examiners, following which a warning was offered. Our client did not wish to accept a warning and further submissions were made. These were accepted and the case was closed with advice.
  • 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Following this, written submissions were made at the Rule 7 stage which resulted in the allegations of dishonesty being withdrawn.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 facing investigation following a complaint from a private patient. The complaint concerned inadequate aftercare following a cosmetic surgical procedure. We represented our client at an Interim Orders Panel hearing which resulted in no order being imposed. Following this the investigation was concluded 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. Written submissions were made at the Rule 7 Stage on the basis that there was not a realistic prospect of our client’s fitness to practise being found to be impaired. The Case Examiners dismissed the case against our client.
  • Our lawyers acted for a Doctor referred to the GMC due to an allegation of deficient professional performance following an operation on a young girl. It was alleged that our client had removed the wrong organ and failed to recognise the error. The matter was heard by a Fitness to Practise panel of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service. The panel found that our client’s fitness to practise was not currently impaired and therefore no sanction was imposed. Our client was able to continue to practice without restriction.

Nursing and Midwifery Council 

  • Our lawyers represented a Midwife in a successful appeal to the High Court against a striking off order imposed by a panel of the NMC’s Conduct and Competence Committee. Our client’s case was that the panel made an error of law, namely that they did not have the legal power to impose a striking-off order in this case. More information about this case can be found here - Annon v Nursing and Midwifery Council.
  • Our lawyers acted for a Midwife in respect of a long-running case which dealt with a number of allegations of poor clinical competence and professional misconduct. The matter was heard by a panel of the NMC’s Conduct and Competence Committee. The panel found that our client’s fitness to practise was not currently impaired and therefore no sanction was imposed. Our client was able to continue to practice without restriction.
  • Our lawyers acted for a Nurse referred to the NMC following a conviction for a serious criminal offence which resulted in a suspended prison sentence. We acted for our client at a hearing before the NMC's Conduct and Competence Committee where compelling evidence of mitigation was presented. No sanction was imposed.
  • Our lawyers acted for a Nurse referred to the NMC due to an allegation of having an inappropriate relationship with a patient’s relative. Written submissions were made to the NMC’s Investigating Committee who found that there was no real prospect of a finding of impairment of fitness to practise. The case was concluded with no further action.
  • Our lawyers acted for a Nurse who faced 2 referrals to the NMC in relation to a number of criminal convictions. The 2 referrals were joined, allowing all matters to be dealt with at one hearing before a panel of the Conduct and Competence Committee. The panel found that our client’s fitness to practice was not currently impaired and therefore no sanction was imposed. Our client was able to continue to practice without restriction.

General Dental Council

  • Our lawyers acted for a large Dental Laboratory in relation to a number of linked investigations by the GDC.  The Company faced both regulatory and criminal investigations while a Director of the Company faced a linked regulatory investigation. All matters were concluded with no further action.
  • Our lawyers acted for a Dental Technician in a long-running case before the GDC. The allegations centred on the construction of a dental appliance which proved to be defective. The matter was heard by a panel of the GDC’s Professional Conduct Committee. The GDC’s lawyers argued that our client should be erased from the register. However the panel found that our client’s fitness to practise was not currently impaired and therefore no sanction was imposed. Our client was able to continue to practice without restriction.
  • Our lawyers acted for a Dentist accused of dishonestly failing to disclose a criminal conviction on an application for registration with the GDC. We represented our client at a hearing before the GDC’s Professional Conduct Committee. The allegation of dishonesty was not found proven and the case was concluded with a reprimand.

​Health and Care Professions Council

  • Our lawyers acted for a Social Worker referred to the HCPC in the aftermath of a high-profile criminal prosecution. Our client was accused of failing to protect service users and failing to escalate concerns. Written submissions were made to the HCPC’s Investigating Committee arguing that the allegations were not well-founded. The Investigating Committee dismissed the case against our client.
  • Our lawyers acted for a Radiographer facing a number of allegations including poor competence and aggressive behaviour. The case was heard by a panel of the HCPC’s Conduct and Competence Committee. The panel found that our client’s fitness to practice was not currently impaired and therefore no sanction was imposed. Our client was able to continue to practice without restriction.
  • Our lawyers acted for a Paramedic facing several allegations of poor professional competence and misconduct. Written submissions were made to the HCPC’s Investigating Committee who found that that there was no reasonable prospect of a finding of impairment of fitness to practise. The Committee therefore concluded the case with no further action.

We're widely accredited for our work - regulatory & criminal justice

  • Legal 500

It is our business to deliver legal services that work for our clients, you can trust our specialists to take care of things on your behalf. Over the years our regulatory and criminal justice team has been recognised by industry awards and accredited for their excellence.

Memberships & accreditations

8.4 out of 10
Trustpilot logo4-stars on trustpilot Based on count 303

We're Great

It is our business to deliver legal services that work for our clients, and you can trust our specialists to take care of things on your behalf.

Our Trustpilot reviews

I was kept up to date at every junction. My case is now closed with no restrictions to my practice. Thank you to Carl and his team especially Laura who worked so diligently on my case! They acted professional at all times. I highly recommend this company.
View from a professional discipline client

Data protection - the true cost of cyber-attacks and data breaches explored...

How confident are you that your business is prepared for a cyber-attack? With ransomware attacks on the rise, there is an ever increasing risk that your organisation will face an attack in the future. If you’re not adequately prepared, the...

Read more

Regulatory Twitter Block

Stephensons appoints new Head of Regulatory Law

Specialist regulatory solicitor and Partner, Carl Johnson , has been appointed as Head of Regulatory Law at the national law firm Stephensons. Carl joined Stephensons in 2010 and became a Partner at the firm in 2015. He specialises in professional...

Read more

staff reorder - professional discipline

  • Sean Joyce
  • Carl Johnson
  • Rachel Adamson
  • Neal Boland
  • ​Alison Marriott
  • Laura Hannah
  • Paul Loughlin
  • ​Amy Grimshaw
  • Francesca Snape

We're always here for you

As an award-winning top 150 law firm, with over 450 staff based in offices across the country, you're never far from the advice you need.

Find your nearest Stephensons office and arrange a meeting

As an award-winning top 150 law firm, with over 450 staff based in offices across the country, you're never far from the advice you need.