Libby Anderson's client found to have no case to answer at the HCPC.

Libby represented a paramedic facing allegations, among others, of sexual misconduct towards their mentee, a student paramedic, in front of the HCPC fitness to practise panel.

The allegations included sexual misconduct and sending Facebook messages that used inappropriate and unprofessional language. There was also an allegation that the paramedic abused a position of trust and an allegation that they had failed to promptly and appropriately report concerns over the student’s clinical performance.

Libby cross-examined the student paramedic to elicit numerous inconsistencies in their account and obtained disclosure that the student, now qualified, was suspended pending an investigation into a Serious Untoward Incident in the course of their own practice. At the close of the HCPCs case, Libby made a submission of no case to answer, successfully arguing that the evidence presented was insufficient due to inherent weakness and vagueness, and because it relied almost exclusively upon the reliability of the student paramedic who had been discredited in cross-examination.

The panel found that the evidence presented was so unsatisfactory in nature that the allegations could not be found proved and there was no case to answer. In so doing, they found that the student had lied on affirmation in order to present themselves as the best possible practitioner, had over-played their position as student mentee, had exaggerated the findings of their own university fitness to practise hearing, and had sought to minimise concerns raised about their clinical performance.

Early admissions were made to the lesser allegations. Libby successfully argued that these did not amount to misconduct and the Panel did not move to consider impairment.

Libby was instructed by Michelle Stewart of Thompsons Solicitors