Doctor Peter Roach v The General Medical Council
[2024] EWHC 1114 (Admin)
DR SUDHEER SHABIR v THE GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL
13 July 2023
[2023] EWHC 1772 (Admin)
High Court
A patient accused a doctor of inappropriately touching her breasts. A tribunal believed the patient, and the doctor appealed. The judge reviewed everything and decided the tribunal made a fair decision, so the doctor's name remains removed from the medical register.
Key Facts
- •Dr Shabir, a doctor who qualified in 2018, was accused of sexual misconduct during a consultation with Patient A on September 23, 2019.
- •Patient A alleged that Dr Shabir inappropriately touched her breasts during two parts of the consultation.
- •Dr Shabir denied the allegations.
- •The Medical Practitioners Tribunal (Tribunal) found the allegations proved and ordered erasure of Dr Shabir's name from the medical register.
- •Dr Shabir appealed the Tribunal's findings of fact to the High Court.
Legal Principles
The High Court will allow an appeal if the Tribunal decision was wrong or unjust due to serious procedural irregularity.
CPR Part 52, Sawati v General Medical Council [2022] EWHC 283 (Admin)
The appeal is a rehearing, allowing the court to substitute its own decision for the Tribunal's.
Section 40 of the Medical Act 1983, Ghosh
Findings of fact, especially those based on witness credibility assessments, are difficult to overturn on appeal.
Gupta v GMC [2002] 1 WLR 1691, Southall v General Medical Council [2010] 2 FLR 1550
The inherent probability or improbability of an event is a factor in assessing the balance of probabilities.
Re H (Minors) (Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) [1996] AC 563
Reasons for a Tribunal decision must be apparent, either explicitly stated or readily inferable from the decision's content.
English v Emery Reimbold & Strick [2002] 1 WLR 2409, Byrne v General Medical Council [2021] EWHC 2237 (Admin)
Sexual motivation can be inferred from touching of sexual organs, lack of clinical justification, and absence of other plausible explanations.
Basson v General Medical Council [2018] EWHC 505 (Admin), Arunkalaivanan v General Medical Council [2014] EWHC 873 (Admin), Haris v General Medical Council [2021] EWCA Civ 763
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The High Court found that the Tribunal's findings were not wrong or unjust. The Tribunal's assessment of witness credibility, consideration of inconsistencies, and handling of good character evidence were deemed appropriate.