Nicholas Hall considers the relevance of inquest proceedings in fitness to practise proceedings in professional discipline law
- It has been a longstanding principle that the conclusions of another body are not relevant to the panel’s findings when determining the fact stage in fitness to practise (FTP) proceedings.
- However, the recent case Towuaghantse v GMC (2021) suggests that coroners’ findings in inquest proceedings, including their narrative conclusions, are relevant.
A development in the recent case of Towuaghantse v GMC [2021] EWHC 681, [2021] All ER (D) (Mar) has the potential to dramatically affect the relationship between regulatory tribunals’ fitness to practise (FTP) proceedings and other tribunals, such as inquest hearings. It is now likely that narrative conclusions from other courts are admissible as evidence in all three stages of FTP proceedings (fact-finding, impairment and sanction).
The question remains whether, in practice, FTP panels will be robust enough to make contradictory conclusions on the evidence available to them. If so, this raises the concern that FTP panels will be on the path to the ‘inevitable conclusion’ before
