Any criminal conviction will be viewed as proven in a fitness to practise case, and attempts at denial could be interpreted as lacking insight.

An Overview of Criminal Convictions Fitness to Practise

In fitness to practise proceedings, criminal convictions (or formal cautions) are treated as fact and will always be found proven.  Common law has established this, and therefore a health and care professional cannot “go behind the conviction” (caution or determination) to seek to persuade a fitness to practise tribunal or panel (or case examiner) of their innocence. Any attempt to go behind the conviction is likely to be interpreted as them lacking insight.

It is also important to note that an acquittal does not necessarily mean that the case will not be found proven.  There are a number of reasons and legal principles that allows a fitness to practise tribunal to make a finding of facts proven in cases where an acquittal applies:

1. In common law, the “double jeopardy” rule does not apply to disciplinary proceedings. There is therefore no bar to the bringing of disciplinary proceedings in respect of the same conduct that has resulted in an acquittal at trial.
2. Disciplinary proceedings and criminal proceedings serve different purposes. The purpose of disciplinary proceedings is not to punish a doctor but ensure continued fitness to practise.
3. The standards of proof are different. In the criminal courts, the burden of proof is “beyond reasonable doubt” whereas GMC cases are decided on a “balance of probabilities” which is a much lower standard of proof. Therefore, different rules apply to evidence, admissibility of evidence and there is no logical incompatibility in seeking to prove a disciplinary matter to the civil standard where there has been an acquittal on the criminal standard of proof.

How criminal offending might affect fitness to practise

Ultimately, your healthcare regulator will ask itself whether the criminal offending in question has any material relevance to your fitness to practice.

As mentioned at the start of this article, criminal offending (past or present) does not necessarily mean that your fitness to practise will be found impaired.  Healthcare regulators will assess the circumstances and details of criminal offending to make a judgement on whether it is likely to adversely impact on fitness to practise.

Healthcare regulators will look at the evidence before it and test this against its own standards and guidance to come to a determination on your fitness to practise.  This will include consideration, where appropriate, insight and remediation.

The rules can be confusing, and healthcare professionals must be careful to ensure they understand the responsibilities on them to report criminal offending where this is necessary.  Failure to do so, or do so in the required timeframe, is likely to result in a fitness to practise investigation and possibly a referral to a fitness to practise tribunal.

Disclaimer: This article is for guidance purposes only. Kings View Chambers accepts no responsibility or liability whatsoever for any action taken, or not taken, in relation to this article. You should seek the appropriate legal advice having regard to your own particular circumstances.