Welcome to the April 2019 edition of Capsticks’ Regulatory Newsletter.

In this edition we have reviewed the following cases: 

  • El Karout v Nursing and Midwifery Council – a case in which the Court reiterated that the admissibility of evidence and the weight to be attached to it are separate matters and should be considered separately
  • General Medical Council v Sledzik – in which the Court did not understand the panel’s determination and so remitted the matter to the same panel for a redetermination of sanction
  • Gale v Solicitors Regulation Authority – a case in which the Court confirmed that the SDT has a wide discretion on costs and whether to refer a case for detailed assessment
  • Maitland-Hudson v Solicitors Regulation Authority – a case on the so-called “appearance trap”, in which the Court held that a tribunal is entitled to take account of its own assessment of a litigant’s capacity to participate in a hearing alongside the medical evidence
  • A Supreme Court decision on the rehabilitation of offenders and disclosure and barring regimes.

Read the April edition of Capsticks' Regulatory Newsletter here.

Regulatory Partner James Penry-Davey spoke to a group of #students from @kentonschool in Newcastle last Friday abou… https://t.co/lCR8p5hlQt

With the deadline for #GPpractices to join a #PrimaryCareNetwork (PCN) fast approaching, the @ardengem service tran… https://t.co/LT7bZZR4Sl

Capsticks' bi-weekly 'Emergency Services Update' provides those involved in delivering #emergencyservices with a sn… https://t.co/6HBkHauU5T

With the application deadline for our legal #apprenticeships this Sunday, Senior Partner @HeenanRachael shares her… https://t.co/wQ3KTVumit