No further action for nurse in ‘incorrect entry’ case
Kings View Chambers secure no case to answer for nurse who made a mistake in their re-registration and revalidation.
Kings View Chambers secure no case to answer for nurse who made a mistake in their re-registration and revalidation.
In this case, a nurse made an entry error when completing their re-registration and revalidation with the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC). The nurse had always accepted that in error the entry was incorrect.
The Investigating Committee were persuaded that the nurse was not acting dishonestly nor fraudulently. Despite the Panel’s findings the NMC still took the view that the entry should be removed, and the nurse should have to reapply. With Kings Views’ representation, we successfully argued against this, and the Panel took no action.
NMC defence barrister, Catherine Stock said:
“These cases are often difficult to prepare for any nurse or midwife as the legal test is a little complicated and as such it is vital to seek appropriate legal advice early on and from lawyers experienced not only in NMC hearings but also in these specific type of hearings.”
LL, the nurse said:
“Would highly recommend Catherine Stock, she represented me in a fitness to practice NMC case, professional, knowledgeable, and has the process perfectly planned for clients. Made an extremely stressful time easier with her wealth of experience.”
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. Some content may have been generated by AI tools.
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.

