Regulatory Newsletter Autumn 201815/10/18
Please find the Autumn edition of Capsticks’ Regulatory Newsletter via this link. In this edition we have included reviews of the following cases:
- General Optical Council v Clarke, a Court of Appeal decision which concluded that a review panel had been correct to decide that a registrant’s retirement did not count in his favour when considering impairment
- Sanusi v General Medical Council, in which the Court held that a panel had been justified in not pausing before embarking on the sanction stage in the case of a voluntarily absent doctor
- Nursing and Midwifery Council v D, a case in which the Court agreed to anonymise the name of a registrant in an application to the Court for an extension of an interim order
- Fernando v General Medical Council, a decision in which the Court clarified the correct test to be applied on an appeal against sanction
- Lindsay v Solicitors Regulation Authority, a case in which the Court agreed with the SDT’s decision to refuse an application by a solicitor for a stay on the grounds of ill health
- Fopma v General Medical Council, in which the Court considered whether a panel should have deferred to the decisions of an overseas regulator when considering sanction.
Please let us know if you have any comments or suggestions for future editions and please do feel free to circulate the newsletter internally within your organisation as you wish.