Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care v General Medical Council & Anor
[2023] EWHC 2391 (Admin)
Dr Itrat Khan v GMC
14 June 2024
[2024] EWHC 1330 (Admin)
High Court
A doctor was suspended for secretly dating a patient and giving them medicine. A higher court agreed with the decision, saying the doctor should have followed medical rules more than dealing with his personal problems. The court said the doctor's actions were serious and he was unfit to practice medicine for a short time.
Key Facts
- •Dr Itrat Khan, a GP, was suspended for six months by the Medical Practitioners’ Tribunal (MPT) for misconduct and impairment.
- •The misconduct involved prescribing medication to and accessing the records of Patient B, with whom he had a sexual and then emotional relationship.
- •Patient B had a history of depression and drug addiction, known to Dr Khan.
- •Dr Khan admitted most allegations relating to Patient B.
- •The MPT found Dr Khan's behaviour amounted to misconduct and that his fitness to practice was impaired.
- •Dr Khan appealed under s 40 of the Medical Act 1983.
Legal Principles
Misconduct involves a standard of behaviour falling short of what is proper or reasonably expected of a doctor.
Adil v General Medical Council [2023] EWCA Civ 1261, [75]; Roylance v General Medical Council (No 2) [2000] 1 AC 311
Misconduct must be serious; trivial, inconsequential, or excusable behavior is not misconduct.
This judgment
A section 40 appeal is a rehearing, but the evidence is not re-heard; the court considers the weight to give to the lower court's decision.
R (Dutta) v General Medical Council [2020] EWHC 1974 (Admin); Fish v General Medical Council [2012] EWHC 1269 (Admin)
The MPT must determine whether misconduct occurred (Stage 1) and whether fitness to practice is impaired (Stage 2). A finding of misconduct is necessary but not sufficient for impairment.
Medical Act 1983, s 35C(2)(a); This judgment
In assessing impairment, the MPT considers the need to protect patients, maintain public confidence, and uphold professional standards.
Cohen v GMC [2008] EWHC 581 (Admin)
The court should approach the MPT’s judgment on serious misconduct and impairment with appropriate deference, considering the MPT’s expertise.
Meadow v General Medical Council [2007] QB 462
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The court found no errors of law or principle in the MPT’s decision. The MPT applied the correct legal principles and gave appropriate weight to all relevant factors. The MPT’s findings of misconduct and impairment were supported by the evidence and were not unreasonable.
Similar Cases
Doctor Peter Roach v The General Medical Council
[2024] EWHC 1114 (Admin)
General Medical Council & Anor v Maxwell Dugboyele
[2024] EWHC 2651 (Admin)
Dr Reeta Singh v General Medical Council
[2024] EWHC 1741 (Admin)
The Professional Standard Authority for Health and Social Care v General Medical Council & Anor.
[2023] EWHC 967 (Admin)