Health and Care Professions Council v Moody

An interim suspension order may be extended where continuation is necessary for public protection. The court should consider the seriousness of the underlying circumstances, the risk of harm, the reasons for the further period sought, and whether the regulator has proceeded with appropriate expedition and diligence. The proposed duration must reflect the procedural position, including the possibility that a final hearing may be adjourned or proceed part-heard. Regular review and the respondent’s ability to seek variation or discharge remain relevant safeguards.

The Health and Care Professions Council applied under Part 8 for a further extension of an interim suspension order concerning a social work practitioner. The respondent, who was aware of the hearing, did not contest the application but requested that it be heard in private. The court declined that request because no good reason had been shown.

The existing order was due to expire before the final disciplinary hearing could take place. The central issue was whether the order should be extended, and for what period.

1. Application granted. The interim suspension order was confirmed and extended for 12 months, with no order for costs.
2. The court declined to sit in private. The respondent had provided no good reason for a private hearing.
3. In deciding whether to extend an interim order, the court considered the Council’s continuing view that extension was necessary for public protection. That view was reasonable in light of the serious circumstances leading to the respondent’s dismissal and suspension and the seriousness of the risk of harm to the public.
4. The court also considered why a further period was required and whether the Council had acted with due expedition and diligence. Although there had been some slippage, the Council had acted with appropriate expedition overall.
5. A 12-month extension was appropriate because the final hearing had not been rescheduled. It was also relevant that such hearings could be adjourned or proceed part-heard. The order would continue to be reviewed quarterly, and the respondent could apply to the High Court for variation or discharge.
6. The order was made under article 31 (7) and (8) of the Health and Social Work Professions Order 2001.