A doctor’s fitness to practise was found not impaired in a case involving a police caution for an issue of violence against a child which was referred to the GMC.

Dr NZ instructed Kings GMC Defence Barristers after moving away from previous representation who advised her to make admissions about facts and impairment which would have led inevitably to sanction.

On Dr NZ’s behalf, GMC Defence Barristers’ lead counsel and leading GMC Defence Barrister, Stephen McCaffrey, submitted legal argument to the GMC and argued before the MPTS that many of the facts the GMC sought to adduce were irrelevant to the case.

Stephen was successful in its legal argument which forced the GMC to agree a schedule of facts to control the narrative at stage 1.  The case moved straight to stage 2 and due to all the remediation and reflection we advised the doctor to complete, Stephen was in a position to argue there was no impairment.

The GMC fought this approach but the MPTS agreed and indeed found no impairment. The GMC then further argued that regardless of this a warning should be issued. Stephen strongly resisted the GMC’s argument and the MPTS agreed again with his argument, refusing to issue a warning and as such the doctor received no sanction.

Leading GMC Defence Barrister, Stephen McCaffrey, commenting on this case said: “It is so important to have faith in your representatives and agree an overall strategy from the outset. It is also important to be able to demonstrate proper and effective insight and remediation.

“We continue to win arguments at stage 2 and beyond because of the time and effort we put into the bundles prepared on behalf of our clients at the MPTS.”

Dr NZ said after the hearing: “Describing Stephen McCaffrey in one sentence would be difficult. He is a very altruistic and sympathetic man. He did nothing but ease me through my journey. His sense of humour never failed to put me at ease in the worst times of my life. He worked with precision, laser focus and accuracy beyond belief. His goal was to find my justice and he did exactly that. His efforts were presented effectively through his writing and his oral arguments. He carried himself in a self-assured manner, and was able to use his emotions to display how he felt about the events occurring. His method of presenting was concise and valuable. His ability to provide emotional support was as quick as a blink of an eye. He went through extreme efforts to acknowledge my concerns and to provide solutions as soon as possible.

“How was his role effective in my case, you ask? Well, I felt like I was walking through a raging fire, with my eyes closed and only his voice to guide me. In simpler terms, if it weren’t for him I wouldn’t have made it out of my hardships. He continually reminded me that I was not facing my issues alone and that my treatment was unfair and it would not last forever. Furthermore, I think I have found a Barrister who I could possibly depend on for life.

“I would highly recommend him to anyone who is facing any sort of issue as he is truly the one who has given me my life back and make it a simple process to do so.”