Claire Robinson's client cleared following GMC investigation.

Claire Robinson, instructed by Carl Johnson of Stephensons Solicitors LLP, secured a finding of no impairment for her client at a hearing before the MPTS.

The case concerned a GP who had worked for three hours a week at a private slimming clinic. The GP faced allegations concerning: the way that controlled drugs were handled at the clinic, a failure to declare this employment at NHS appraisals, and dishonesty.

A successful admissibility argument to exclude evidence of (what purported to be) a police interview, conducted during an inspection of the clinic, changed the nature of the case. The Tribunal agreed that there had been multiple breaches of Code C of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, including the caution not being explained, not being told there was a right to free and independent legal advice and the questions and answers not being accurately recorded. These were found to be clear breaches and that admitting the evidence would be unfair to the GP. The ruling resulted in an application by the GMC to withdraw the charges flowing from this interview, which included all but one of the dishonesty allegations.

The only allegation found proved was that the locum work at the clinic had not been declared during NHS appraisals, which had been admitted by the GP at the start of the hearing. The Tribunal accepted that the GP had not known that there was a requirement to declare private locum work during NHS appraisals and found that there had been no dishonesty.

The Tribunal found that this was not conduct that fellow professionals would find deplorable, and that it did not amount to misconduct so there could be no finding of impairment. A warning was considered neither necessary nor appropriate in this case.