R Saunders v General Medical Council
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | MR JUSTICE HOOPER |
| Judgment Date | 26 October 2001 |
| Neutral Citation | [2001] EWHC 859 (Admin) |
| Docket Number | NO: CO/841/2001 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
| Date | 26 October 2001 |
[2001] EWHC 859 (Admin)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
Mr Justice Hooper
NO: CO/841/2001
MR J AUBURN (instructed by Clyde & Co) appeared on behalf of the Claimant
MR G CLARKE (instructed by Field Fisher Waterhouse) appeared on behalf of the Defendant
This is an application by the claimant, Dr. Saunders, for his costs arising out of a decision of the defendant to drop disciplinary proceedings against him.
On March 5th 2001, Dr. Saunders issued judicial review proceedings. He had three grounds. One, which was a very technical ground, I do not believe could ever have succeeded. His second ground was a root and branch attack upon the decision of what is known as the Preliminary Proceedings Committee ("PPC") to refer a disciplinary charge to the Professional Conduct Committee ("PCC"). That decision was said to be perverse. Thirdly, there was an article 6 attack upon the tribunal which, applying the test, for example, in Ex parte The Church of Scientology, I cannot say would probably have been successful.
I shall concentrate, therefore, on the second ground. The charge brought against Dr. Saunders related to a letter which he had sent on 31st October 1995 to the Leicester Royal Infirmary providing a reference for a surgeon, Mr Richard Neal. The charge alleged that the letter of reference was misleading in that it had made no reference to concerns which it is said Dr. Saunders had about the conduct of Mr Neal. Those concerns were itemised for me this morning as: he not being always available on call; his demeanour to junior staff; the making of a false travel claim; the misappropriation of national health service drugs for his own private practice; and a misrepresentation as to a position which he said he held.
From the outset, Dr. Saunders has been consistent and persistent in his denial of the charges against him, albeit that he did accept at the end of a long letter that, if he was wrong to do that which he had done, then he apologised for the error of judgment. The thrust of Dr. Saunders' case (see, for example, pages 478 and 439), about which the PPC knew before they sent the charge to the GMC, was that disciplinary proceedings against Mr Neal had been dropped shortly before they were due to start. Dr. Saunders had been told by Steve Spoerry, the then director of operations, that the Trust had been advised by its lawyers not to proceed with the disciplinary action. In the light of that advice a deal was negotiated with the BMA on behalf of Mr Neal and the terms of the settlement agreement were approved by the Trust on the basis of legal advice. He attached a copy of the signed...
To continue reading
Request your trial