Pharmaceutical Professional’s Fitness to Practise not Impaired
M instructed Kings View Chambers to represent them in a case involving dishonesty in the workplace.
In this case, M, was accused of dishonesty in the workplace. They instructed Kings View early on in the proceedings when the matter was first referred to the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC).
Fitness to practise defence barrister, Catherine Stock, said:
“The client worked with us to ensure that they responded well to all correspondence to the GPhC. In this case, the client was able to focus on taking the correct steps to ensure insight was achieved and appropriate and relevant remediation was undertaken.”
With representation from Kings View Chambers, the GPhC’s Fitness to Practise Committee (FtPC) reached a finding that M’s fitness to practise was not currently impaired even where dishonest conduct was admitted.
M, said:
“Your dedication and commitment to ensuring the best outcome have been truly remarkable, and I am deeply grateful for all that you have done. Your professionalism and expertise have made a profound impact on my case. From the very beginning, you and Stephen guided me in the right direction. Your impact on my life has been immeasurable.”
Disclaimer: This article is for guidance purposes only. Kings View Chambers accepts no responsibility or liability whatsoever for any action taken, or not taken, in relation to this article. You should seek the appropriate legal advice having regard to your own particular circumstances.
More News & Articles
The behaviours most likely to put doctors before a tribunal
Newly published MPTS data for 2025–26 provides a detailed picture of the types of cases reaching substantive hearings and the factors that most commonly lead to findings of impairment, suspension or erasure.
GDC consultation signals a shift in early‑stage fitness to practise decision‑making — what dentists need to know
GDC launches consultation on new early‑stage fitness to practise guidance, shaping how concerns about dentists are assessed, escalated or closed.
High Court warns against prolonged interim orders in fitness to practise cases
The High Court has delivered an important reminder to healthcare regulators that interim orders are protective measures, not a substitute for progressing a fitness to practise investigation.

