Aaalamani, R (on the application of) v General Medical Council

An administrative court may proceed with a judicial review application where the applicant has repeatedly failed to attend and provides no explanation for the absence. The application may be dismissed where, after considering the decision under challenge and the respondent’s submissions and materials, the court concludes that there is no realistic prospect of success.

Dr Aaalamani sought permission for judicial review in relation to proceedings in July 2006 and the General Medical Council’s decision letter dated 25 July 2006. He did not attend the hearing and was not represented. The court considered his history of non-attendance, the decision letter, the surrounding documentation and the GMC’s written and oral submissions.

The issues were whether the court should proceed in the applicant’s absence and whether the proposed challenge had any prospect of success.

1. The court was entitled to proceed in the applicant’s absence. That conclusion followed from his long record of failing to attend and the absence of any explanation for his reported departure to Iran.
2. Having considered the GMC’s decision letter dated 25 July 2006, the surrounding documentation and the respondent’s submissions, the court concluded that the proposed judicial review had no merit and no prospect whatever of success.
3. The application was dismissed. The respondent was awarded costs of £7,500, subject to the applicant making detailed written representations within 28 days. If representations were received, the respondent would have 21 days from receipt to respond.

The judgment does not identify an appeal or a prior reported decision. It refers to proceedings in July 2006, in respect of which the claimant sought permission for judicial review.