Nursing and Midwifery Council v Donga

[2012] EWHC 2587 (Admin)

Case details

Case citations
[2012] EWHC 2587 (Admin)
Court
High Court (Administrative Court)
Judgment date
18 September 2012
Judgment text

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Subjects
Administrative Professional discipline Interim suspension orders
Keywords
Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001 article 31(8) interim suspension order public protection public interest fitness to practise regulatory proceedings
Outcome
application granted (interim suspension order extended for six months)
Judicial consideration

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Summary

Under article 31(8) of the Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001, the court may extend an interim suspension order where continuation is necessary to protect the public or is otherwise in the public interest. The court should consider the circumstances of the case, the progress and anticipated conclusion of the regulatory proceedings, and the risks created by allowing the order to expire. An extension is justified where there remains a risk of patient harm or of undermining public confidence in the regulatory process.

Factual background

The Nursing and Midwifery Council sought a further six-month extension of an interim suspension order imposed by its Practice Committee against a registered nurse. The order had been made after allegations that the respondent was working illegally, using counterfeit documents, and possibly obtaining nursing qualifications on a false basis. The respondent had disappeared and did not attend or engage with the application. The issue was whether continuation of the interim order was necessary for public protection or otherwise in the public interest under article 31(8) of the Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001.

Held

  1. The application was granted. The interim suspension order was extended for six months, until 4pm on 29 March 2013.
  2. In considering an application to extend an interim order under article 31(8) of the Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001, the court had regard to the guidance in General Medical Council v Hiew [2007] EWCA Civ 369.
  3. The relevant assessment was whether continuation of the order was necessary to protect the public or otherwise in the public interest. The court considered the serious allegations, the uncertainty surrounding the respondent’s identity and qualifications, the respondent’s disappearance, the progress of the proceedings, and the expectation that the case would conclude within the extended period.
  4. Without an extension, there remained a risk of patient harm and a danger that public confidence in the regulatory process would be undermined. Those considerations justified continuation of the suspension.

The court’s approach to earlier authorities

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Key cases cited

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Cases citing this case

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.