In something of a landmark decision the Court of Appeal have today decided in the case of Meadows -v- GMC that an expert can be subject to disciplinary action.
Sir Anthony Clarke, Master of the Rolls, said:
> It seems to me that the solution to particular problems in particular professions must be reached by discussion and, if appropriate, rule change, not by what to my mind would be an unprincipled extension of the common law immunity from civil suit.
Sir Roy Meadows had given evidence in, inter alia, the 1999 trial of Sally Clerk, who was charged with murdering her two children. She was acquitted in 2003 and Sir Roy was struck off by the GMC. He appealed against the decision, and the Court of Appeal, though finding that he should not, in the circumstances, have been struck, nonetheless found that the GMC were entitled to bring disciplinary proceedings against him.
Although I have not seen the judgment yet, it seems reasonable to assume – especially in light of Sir Anthony’s comments – that this will embrace all professionals. Insurers take note.
See various sources.
Related posts:
- Limitation: A second bite at the cherry Summary Under the 1979 House of Lords’ decision in...
- Arbitration awards: challenge on grounds of ‘irregularity’ English arbitrations are generally certain, final and enforceable. They...
- RMP -v- Brent: A decisive victory In a 3-0 decision the Court of Appeal has...
- Beware the literal Insurers should be wary of reliance on an apparently...
- RMP v Brent 2 – competition We won the second phase of our case for...
