Nursing and Midwifery Council v Rogers-Hughes

An interim professional-disciplinary order should continue where the court concludes that continuation is in the public interest. The court must, however, remain alert to delay between notification of the matter and the final disciplinary hearing. Where continuation is ordered despite delay, the regulator should adhere strictly to the timetable for bringing the proceedings to final determination.

The Nursing and Midwifery Council applied for continuation of an interim order concerning disciplinary proceedings against Annie Rogers-Hughes. The proceedings had taken substantial time to progress, although the case had reached the scheduling stage and was expected to be listed for a two-day hearing. The defendant did not appear or make representations. The central issue was whether the interim order should continue pending the final disciplinary hearing.

1. The application was granted and the interim order was continued. The court considered continuation clearly appropriate in the public interest, having regard to the nature of the disciplinary proceedings and the need to protect the public pending their conclusion.
2. The court recognised that the matter had been outstanding for a considerable period, notwithstanding that the defendant had referred herself in relation to her own alleged misconduct. The delay did not outweigh the public interest in continuation of the interim order.
3. The regulator explained that its external investigation had caused some delay, but that the case had progressed to the scheduling team. Only two live witnesses were anticipated, and a two-day hearing was expected between September and November 2010.
4. The court expressed the wish that the stated timetable should be strictly observed and the hope that, in future cases of this kind, the period between first notification and final hearing would be reduced.

Not stated in the judgment.