Nikita has experience of both healthcare and financial regulation.
Before commencing pupillage Nikita worked as an Adjudicator at the Financial Ombudsman Service. As an Adjudicator she investigated and ultimately decided upon complaints brought against financial institutions. During pupillage she has advised upon the application of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 to proposed business structures. Dovetailing her fraud experience with her regulatory work, Nikita also regularly appears before accountancy regulators such as the ACCA.
Nikita has extensive experience of proceedings before the Nursing and Midwifery Council; particularly interim orders before the Investigative Committee and Registrations Appeals.
She was instructed by a leading professional regulation firm to review and provide advice upon proceedings before the General Pharmaceutical Society relating to the largest pharmaceutical fraud investigated by the MHRA.
ACCA v ML
Fitness to Practise
Nikita represented an accountant facing 5 allegations of misconduct, including two of dishonesty, before the ACCA. The allegations centred on a criminal conviction he had received for Assaulting a Police Officer and his subsequent failure both to declare the conviction upon registration (dishonestly it was alleged) and failure to refer himself to the ACCA. Following legal submissions the ACCA offered no evidence on the two allegation relating to self-referral. At a hearing the committee of the ACCA found the remaining two allegations, including that of dishonesty, for failing to declare the conviction unproved. The ACCA agreed with Nikita’s submissions that the ACCA’s own process, in part, led to the omission.
GPhC v JQ
Fitness to Practise
The registrant had been charged in criminal proceedings as a party to the largest pharmaceutical fraud the UK has seen in which counterfeit medicines, including those for cancer, had infiltrated the NHS. Following acquittal in the criminal proceedings Nikita was instructed by the General Pharmaceutical Council to work, together with the MHRA, to consider in excess of 20,000 pages of evidence to advice upon proceedings before the GPhC.