Kings View Chambers secured no case to answer at the close of the GMC case.

Dr C qualified in 2000 and, prior to the events which were the subject of the hearing, Dr C was working as a Locum Sessional GP in the North East of England.

The allegation against Dr C that led to the hearing centred around an interview which took place at CBC Health, conducted by another doctor in April 2018. Dr C was being interviewed regarding out of hours GP sessions.

After the interview but on the same day, the other doctor sent a complaint to the GMC, in which he stated that Dr C was:

“specifically asked the following questions “Did the interviewee disclose whether any undertakings, restrictions or warnings have been placed upon his practice by the Registered Body (GMC) or NHS Organisations? And secondly “is the doctor currently under investigation by the Registered body (GMC) or NHS Organisation? The doctors response to both questions was “No”. At the end of the interview I asked the interviewee to sign the statements relating to GMC restrictions and investigations. At this point the interviewee disclosed that there were, indeed, restrictions on his prescribing and that he as unable to prescribe opiate or hypnotic medications.”

The complaint subsequently led to an allegation of falsely answering ‘No’ in the interview to specific questions and that those actions were dishonest.

Dr C was represented by barrister Stephen McCaffrey who secured the following outcome for Dr C in the case:

  • No finding of dishonesty on the points not admitted by Dr C;
  • No Misconduct Found

Dr C:

 If Carlsberg ran regulatory law firms…this would probably be one of the best regulatory law firms in the world.

 They are truly the X-Factor of regulatory barristers.

I was involved in a malicious GMC case which caused 15 months of severe stress and hell. I involved a “big named” regulatory law firm initially but that did not stop my case going to tribunal. Not satisfied with this particular law firm and the handling of my case, I went to search the internet hoping to find an exceptional team and I am thankful for stumbling across the truly magnificent and superior expert team of regulatory barristers – Stephen McCaffrey and Catherine Stock. They reassured me that they could take on my case and help me. I felt extremely confident that they could handle my case and was also reassured by great reviews on their site. They gave me excellent advice throughout, Catherine prepared my case and Stephen accompanied me to the tribunal and gave such an exceptional performance that my case was closed early (next day) following half time submission. 

I truly wholeheartedly and personally recommend this exceptional regulatory barrister team that not only provides direct public access (so no “middle man”) but realistic, reasonable fees.

Thank you to you both from the bottom of my heart.

Kings View Chambers

Founded in 2014 by Stephen McCaffrey and Catherine Stock, Kings View Chambers seeks to address the failings in traditional chambers and establish a new and better way for barristers to work.

Specialist healthcare and medical regulation defence barristers dealing with all fitness to practise matters before:


Are you a healthcare professional with a fitness to practise issue?

Speak to a expert defence barrister today for a free, no obligation case assessment.

If Carlsberg ran regulatory law firms…this would probably be one of the best regulatory law firms in the world. They are truly the X-Factor of regulatory barristers.

Dr in GMC case