The GMC Investigation Process
When a complaint or concern is referred to the GMC, it is first considered by case examiners who assess whether there is a real prospect that a Medical Practitioners Tribunal will find that fitness to practise is impaired. Prior to any referral to a hearing, doctors are usually invited to provide a response to the allegations. This response is a critically important document — a well-prepared, evidence-based response can result in the case being closed at the investigation stage without the need for a hearing at all. Our solicitors are experienced in drafting responses that address the GMC's concerns directly and comprehensively.
Interim Orders Tribunals
Where the GMC considers it necessary to protect the public, it may apply to an Interim Orders Tribunal for interim conditions or interim suspension to be imposed on a doctor's registration while the investigation is ongoing. An IOT hearing can take place at very short notice and can have an immediate impact on your ability to practise. If you are facing an IOT hearing, specialist legal advice is essential immediately. Our solicitors can attend at short notice, make submissions on your behalf, and work to avoid or minimise the impact of any interim order.
What the MPTS Considers at a Hearing
At a fitness to practise hearing, the MPTS tribunal considers whether the facts alleged are proved, whether those facts amount to impaired fitness to practise, and if so, what sanction is appropriate. The civil standard of proof — the balance of probabilities — applies. Key factors that influence the outcome include the seriousness of the conduct, the extent of any departure from Good Medical Practice, whether it is remediable, whether genuine insight and remediation have been demonstrated, your previous regulatory history, and the risk of repetition. The range of outcomes runs from no further action through to erasure.
Types of Cases We Handle
We represent doctors in GMC proceedings arising from clinical performance concerns and poor professional performance, clinical errors and concerns following serious untoward incidents, prescribing concerns and medication-related allegations, failure to obtain informed consent, allegations of dishonesty or fraud including in research or publications, inappropriate conduct towards patients, health impairment including dependency issues, criminal convictions or cautions, workplace conduct allegations including bullying and harassment, social media misconduct, and adverse determinations by other regulatory bodies.
Defences, Mitigation, and Your Right to Choose Your Solicitor
Where allegations are factually disputed, we challenge the evidence relied upon, obtain expert clinical opinion, cross-examine witnesses, and present the strongest possible case at any hearing. Where facts are accepted, we present compelling mitigation drawing on evidence of insight, remediation, good character, and the wider context of practice. In health impairment cases, we work closely with treating clinicians and independent health assessors. Many MDU, MPS, and MDDUS members can instruct a solicitor of their own choosing with costs met by their defence organisation — contact us and we will review your policy at no obligation.