Kings View Chambers secures case closed of doctor
Case closed for doctor who faced multiple charges of lack of probity as well as a driving related conviction.
Case closed for doctor who faced multiple charges of lack of probity as well as a driving related conviction.
Kings View Chambers’ joint head of Chambers and leading GMC Defence Barrister, Catherine Stock, represented Dr US. Before the GMC, she argued successfully that the doctor’s actions did not necessarily warrant a referral to a fitness to practise tribunal, given the circumstances.
As a result of Catherine’s representations, Dr US’s case was closed prior to Case Examiners stage (Rule 7 stage).
As a consequence, Dr US was given a warning and the case was closed.
Leading GMC Defence Barrister, Catherine Stock, said in relation to this case: “It is so important to ensure that even when there is a case to answer on facts that you are able to demonstrate remediation at an early stage, as this will, in many cases reduce the chance of your case being referred to a tribunal.”
Dr US said: “Excellent service and knowledge with experience have made Kings View Chamber outstanding.
“I am a doctor and in my case the first point of interaction was the barrister Catherine Stock. My case was very complicated with more than 10 allegations included dishonesty and probity along with a driving offence for which I was convicted by court.
“Although there were so my instructions, she made the case very sensibly when I was expecting a suspension, my case ended with a warning only which saved my future. I am so happy.”
More News & Articles
When does delay in fitness to practise proceedings become unfair? High Court considers seven-year NMC case
Can lengthy fitness to practise delays amount to unfairness or an abuse of process? The High Court examines a seven-year NMC case and the legal implications for healthcare regulators and registrants.
What drives the most serious fitness to practise outcomes? GMC study points to four key factors
What factors are most likely to lead to serious fitness to practise sanctions for doctors? GMC research finds criminal convictions, the seriousness of concerns, allegation type and referral source are the strongest predictors of severe regulatory outcomes.
GMC v Sathyanath: what doctors need to know about clinical examinations, consent and fitness to practise
The High Court’s decision highlights the importance of clinical justification, informed consent and professional boundaries, with practical lessons for doctors and other regulated healthcare professionals.

