Our experts examine the use and admissibility of covert recordings in regulatory proceedings.

The Office for Health Improvement and Disparities has released guidance which provides a definition of trauma-informed practice. It features key principles of trauma-informed practice and how it can be built into services and systems.

In General Medical Council v Webberley [2021] EWHC 3620 (Admin), the Court was asked to consider an application to extend an interim order. Dr Webberley contested the GMC’s application. In this insight, Jackie Carson explores the decision in more detail.

In Sawati v General Medical Council [2022] EWHC 283 (Admin), the High Court considered how to approach the situation where an individual’s defence has been discounted by a tribunal, and how that might be relevant to impairment and sanction.

Jo Howard explores some of the key points to be drawn from the Court of Appeal’s decision in respect of the handling of conditional discharges in disciplinary proceedings.

The High Court has overturned a decision of the IOT of the GMC to impose conditions on the registration of a doctor prohibiting him from using social media to share his views on Covid-19. We explain the judgment and its potential effects for regulators.

The Court of Appeal held that the Chief Constable was liable for any disability discrimination by the statutory police misconduct panel that had determined disciplinary allegations against the claimant police officer.

The High Court allowed an appeal by the Authority challenging the findings of the GOC’s committee regarding the registrant’s fitness to practise and sanction. Learn about key lessons, including giving a clear explanation why conclusions have been reached.

This case highlights the need for regulatory tribunals to consider carefully the applicable sanctions guidance, and to ensure that any departure from that guidance is properly explained. Sophie Keenan explores the judgment in more detail.

The Court quashed the decision of the MPT, finding that it had not sufficiently explained its reasons for rejecting Dr Mokhammad’s evidence. Regulators and panels may find this case interesting when dealing with cases based on competing witness evidence.

The Court of Appeal clarified the different tests to be adopted by the court on an appeal by a medical practitioner and on an appeal by the GMC. Read more in our insight.

The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court decision which quashed the Medical Practitioners Tribunal’s (MPT) determination that the conduct of the doctor in question was not sexually motivated. Hannah Pilkington explores the two judgments in more detail.