Please sign in with your existing account details.
Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.
Privacy statement - Terms and conditions
Forgotten your password?
You have exceeded the maximum number of login attempts for this email address and your account has been locked. An email has been sent to member of Browne Jacobson's web team and some one will be contacting you over the next two working days with details of how to change your password.
Are you sure you want to remove this item from you pinned content?
The recent case of the General Medical Council v Hayat [2018] EWCA CIV 2796 has reaffirmed the principles for allowing an adjournment due to medical grounds. The Court of Appeal has allowed an appeal against the decision of Lang J holding that she failed to apply the correct principles when finding that a tribunal had wrongly refused to adjourn a disciplinary hearing on medical grounds. The court discussed the key authorities and made a number of observations on the risk of using pro forma sick notes, which is useful for civil litigators, even though the case originated from a disciplinary tribunal.
In the index case, the GMC had brought disciplinary proceedings against a doctor. These included allegations of feigning a heart attack and a related insurance fraud. There were three unsuccessful adjournment applications following which, the doctor was admitted to hospital complaining of chest pains. The GMC continued the hearing in the doctor’s absence, relying on emails from two doctors who had treated him, who considered him fit to attend the hearing. Following this the doctor submitted a sick note to the tribunal which described him as being "unfit for work". The tribunal concluded that the doctor was voluntarily absent from the hearing and found against him. The doctor appealed the tribunal’s findings and approach and Lang J held that the refusal to adjourn constituted a serious procedural irregularity.
The Court of Appeal held that:
Overall, this is a useful case for practitioners to consider when applying or considering an application for an adjournment of a hearing on medical grounds.
Based on our work with foundation trusts over the last 12 months we have identified 5 key situations in which a foundation trust may need to refresh its constitution
View
The Liberty Protection Safeguards (LPS) will be used to authorise the proportionate and necessary deprivation of liberty for people aged 16 and above who lack the mental capacity to consent to their care arrangements.
We invite you to an on-demand webinar looking at the key legal and practical implications for healthcare employers arising from the NHS England VCOD Guidance and actions required in Phase 2 implementation stage.
There is much still to learn about how the strategy will be implemented and those details will play a huge part in determining the final outcome. However, there are grounds for optimism.
The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.
Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.
Sign up