Dr Bux produced expert medical reports on “an industrial scale” to support insurance claims. These reports “invariably” supported the claim. Between 2016-2017 he churned out a total of 684 reports and earned £123,120 for his pains. The court found no evidence he ever produced a negative expert opinion. In doing so Dr Bux did not […]
Bilta v SVS Securities and others [2021] EWHC 36 (Ch) The third national lockdown has seen a shift in the approach of many healthcare regulators. There is now a radically increased drive to deal with cases remotely – even if contested evidence is involved – and even if the allegation is one of dishonesty. In […]
The status of medical records is a key consideration in many regulatory cases. It may often be critical. Indeed, it may sometimes be the only bulwark against a patient’s vehement recollection – years after the event – that a particular symptom was present on a given day, or some specific advice was not given by […]
Dr Haris faced allegations from two patients that he had conducted non-clinically indicated, intimate examinations without consent. He asserted forcefully that the alleged conduct simply never happened – and also called additional evidence to support his position that he was asexual. The MPT accepted the evidence of the two patients and found the majority of […]
2 Hare Court Professional Discipline Newsletter June 2020 Contents Introduction A look into the remote future: Andrew Colman and Natasha Ricioppo Keep calm and carry on (remotely) – One Blackfriars: Lewis Macdonald The impact of Coronavirus on Inquests: Tom Day Reviving Article 2 – Re Dalton: Hannah Thomas […]
25th Jun 2021 Read more
24th Jun 2021 Read more