McMorine, R (on the application of) v Nursing & Midwifery Council

[2008] EWHC 1821 (Admin)

Case details

Case citations
[2008] EWHC 1821 (Admin)
Court
High Court (Administrative Court)
Judgment date
11 July 2008
Judgment text

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Subjects
Administrative Professional discipline Interim suspension orders
Keywords
interim suspension order professional discipline nurse protection of the public service of notice disciplinary hearing extension of suspension
Outcome
application granted
Judicial consideration

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Summary

An interim suspension order may be extended where the court is satisfied that continued suspension remains justified for the protection of the public and that a further period is reasonably required to cover the impending disciplinary hearing, including the possibility that it may not conclude on the fixed date. The court must also be satisfied that proper notice of the application has been served at the only address available for the registrant.

Factual background

The claimant was a nurse employed at a care home during the first half of 2005. Following serious concerns, the Nursing and Midwifery Council’s Investigating Committee imposed an interim suspension order on 14 March 2006. The order had subsequently been extended, but was due to expire shortly before a fixed disciplinary hearing on 22 August 2008. The Council applied for a further four-month extension. Notice had been sent by recorded delivery to the claimant’s registered address but was returned on the hearing date.

The issues were whether proper service had been effected and whether the interim suspension should be extended pending completion of the disciplinary proceedings.

Held

  1. The court was satisfied that the Council had taken proper steps to notify the claimant. Notice had been sent by recorded delivery on 18 June 2008 to the only address provided by her to the Council. Maintaining an up-to-date address was a professional requirement. The fact that the notice was returned did not prevent the court from proceeding where the circumstances of non-acceptance were unknown.
  2. The original interim suspension had been supported by cogent reasons indicating that protection of the public was its underlying basis. The disciplinary proceedings had been delayed by a number of adjournments, which were described as no one’s fault.
  3. Because a fixed hearing date had been arranged for 22 August 2008, and because the hearing might continue part-heard and require a further date, a four-month extension was reasonably required. The interim suspension order was therefore extended for four months from 11 July 2008, until 11 November 2008.

The court’s approach to earlier authorities

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Appellate history

Not stated in the judgment.

Key cases cited

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Cases citing this case

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.