Early resolution for pharmacist facing GPhC fitness to practise investigation
This case involved a pharmacist facing fitness to practise investigation by the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) for allegations of drink driving.
This case involved a pharmacist facing fitness to practise investigation by the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) for allegations of drink driving.
Kings View Chambers’ early involvement in this case resulted in achieving undertakings for the pharmacist in a case which would otherwise have resulted in a full General Pharmaceutical Council fitness to practise tribunal.
The pharmacist in this case also commented that he had contact with other solicitors and barristers but did not like their approach and found Kings View Chambers clear, helpful and professional throughout saying:
Catherine Stock has been an amazing pillar of support throughout my investigation with the GPhC. From the moment I made contact with Kings Chambers and Catherine allocated as my barrister, I felt a huge wait lifted. I had been in contact with other law firms and spoke to many barristers, but I didn’t like their approach.
Catherine has a calm and professional manner and you can feel that she cares about you and your case. Catherine is timely and clear in her responses. I would recommend Catherine and Kings Chambers for anyone who finds themselves in an investigation with their professional body.
I cannot thank you enough.
More News & Articles
Sexual misconduct, remediation and fitness to practise: lessons from Sadiq v GMC
Sexual misconduct is hard to remediate, but insight and structured remediation can still influence sanctions.
The GMC’s new guidance on raising patient safety concerns: implications for doctors’ fitness to practise
The GMC’s new consultation reinforces doctors’ duty to raise patient safety concerns, with fitness to practise risks for failures and a need for early expert legal advice.
Assessing insight when a registrant denies allegations in fitness to practise proceedings
How fitness to practise panels can assess genuine insight when a registrant denies allegations and offers no apology, balancing fairness with public protection.
