The past few months have seen the publication of judgments in three PSA cases. In this article, we summarise the issues arising.

In Safdar v General Medical Council [2025] EWHC 3176 (Admin), the High Court dismissed an appeal against the decision of a Medical Practitioners Tribunal to impose a sanction of erasure.

In Ajana v NMC [2025] EWHC 3179 (Admin), the High Court upheld the NMC’s decision to strike off Ms Olubokola Bridget Ajana, a midwife found to have committed serious misconduct following allegations from seven mothers between June 2020 and April 2021.

The High Court’s decision in Nurrish v NMC [2026] EWHC 2 (Admin) provides important guidance for regulators on the proper conduct of review hearings, the treatment of alleged dishonesty, and the safeguards required before overturning a sanction.

In Lee v General Medical Council [2025] EWHC 3347 (Admin) the High Court examined the approach of a Medical Practitioner’s Tribunal to the evidence of a witness who had died prior to the hearing.

The High Court quashes a three-month suspension due to the panel’s reasoning in respect of dishonesty.

In the recent case of R(on the application of Hippolyte) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] EWCA Civ 1493, the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against a decision of Sheldon J dismissing Ms Hippolyte’s claim for judicial review.

In Nursing and Midwifery Council v Ibrahim [2025] EWCA Civ 1631, the Court of Appeal dismissed the NMC’s appeal against a High Court decision.

The case of Peter Aston v United Kingdom Council for Psychotherapy [2025] EWHC 3288 (KB) concerned a private law challenge to a decision by the UK Council for Psychotherapy (UKCP)

In a recent High Court decision, Collins Rice J gave an important ruling on the approach to expiry dates for Substantive Orders.

The High Court has ruled that the Medical Practitioners Tribunal’s decision to suspend a doctor for six months for sexual misconduct was “fundamentally flawed” due to a failure to consider the evidence of the vulnerability of the patient complainant.

In Suleman v General Optical Council [2023] EWHC 2110 (Admin), the High Court re-visited the issue of bias and the appearance of bias.