In this case, our client, IB, was successful on their first attempt seeking restoration to the General Medical Council’s (GMC) register. Their application was opposed by the GMC.
Kings View Chambers’ Joint Head of Chambers and fitness to practise defence barrister, Catherine Stock, said:
“The reason our client’s restoration application was successful is that they made enquiries very soon after they were erased and put in place a 5-year plan of remediation. They sought our expert advice and worked across a number of years to ensure they have fully remediated their past conduct.”
The GMC is unlikely to consider restoration applications until at least 5 years have elapsed from the date of the disciplinary erasure, and applications for restoration following a disciplinary erasure will be referred to the MPTS.
IB said:
“I got the outcome I wanted, and it’s because Catherine is an exceptionally good barrister, who does not take any chances. She would make you work hard, but if you listen to all she tells you, you would be successful. I highly recommend her work to anyone in difficulty with the regulator. She’s a game changer.”
Substantial weight is attached to insight and remediation.
A restoration application following erasure due to impaired fitness to practise needs to be approached with great care and consideration as to the right approach. Doctors seeking restoration under these circumstances have sufficient time to prepare their case and evidence.
Catherine continued:
“If you have been erased or suspended by your regulator, seek advice early. The sooner you engage our services, the better chance of a successful outcome.”
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.