Social Work England v Khalled Saeed Badwi

An interim conditions of practice order may be extended only where the extension, its duration and the nature of the order are necessary for public protection, the public interest or the practitioner’s own interests. Relevant considerations include the gravity of the allegations, the seriousness of the risk, the reasons for delay and prejudice to the practitioner. The court must not determine the allegations or make findings of fact at the interim stage.

Social Work England applied under Social Workers Regulations 2018 Sch 2 §14 to extend for six months an interim conditions of practice order imposed on the defendant. The order had replaced an interim suspension order and had previously been extended by consent. The defendant, although served, did not attend or make written submissions.

The application concerned allegations arising from drink-driving and disqualified-driving offences, alleged failures to report arrests to an employer, and alleged unmanaged health conditions. The central issue was whether a further six-month extension was necessary and proportionate pending the final hearing.

1. The application was properly heard in the defendant’s absence. The defendant had been served, had communicated his non-attendance, and the hearing arrangements had been made publicly available. No liberty-to-apply protection was required.
2. The governing test was necessity. The court had to determine whether an extension was necessary for the protection of the public, in the public interest or for the practitioner’s own interests, including the necessity of the duration and nature of the interim order. GMC v Hiew [2007] EWCA Civ 369 identified relevant considerations: the gravity of the allegations, the seriousness of the risk, the reasons why the case had not concluded and prejudice to the practitioner.
3. At the interim stage, the court must not make findings of fact or determine the allegations. It assesses whether the material discloses a sufficient prima facie case and whether interim protection remains necessary.
4. The concerns, reports and outstanding addendum provided a substantial and cogent basis for continuing the order. The existing conditions, including notification, information, reporting and testing duties, remained necessary and sufficient to protect the public, the public interest and the practitioner while disclosure, responses and the final hearing were completed.
5. The interim risks and relevant public and personal interests decisively outweighed the prejudice to the defendant, notwithstanding his positive engagement and subsequent employment. The six-month extension was granted to 19 April 2023, with no order as to costs.

First-instance application under Social Workers Regulations 2018 Sch 2 §14. The judgment records an earlier extension by this Court but no appellate history.