GDC unlawfully disclosed Family Court documents

In General Dental Council v KK & Anor [2024] EWHC 3053 (Fam), Mrs Justice Knowles found that the General Dental Council improperly obtained sensitive documents from care proceedings before the Family Court in fitness to practise case.

The GDC initiated fitness to practise proceedings against a dental technician based on allegations of domestic abuse. The GDC improperly obtained sensitive documents from care proceedings before the Family Court from Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council, without the required court order. The documents and witness statements provided were in contravention of s12 of the Administration of Justice Act 1960.

The court had to address the GDC’s application for disclosure of these documents and potential contempt proceedings.

Section 33B(2) of the Dentists Act 1984 allows the GDC to request relevant information for fitness to practise evaluations, but it does not override prohibitions in other enactments.

During the fitness to practise hearings, it was realized that proper permission from the Family Court had not been obtained, leading the GDC to request an adjournment.

Mrs Justice Knowles said in her judgement:

“The contents of this judgment stand as a salutary warning to local authorities and to other public bodies concerned with fitness to practise in occupations concerned with or touching on the welfare of children. It is plain that there was a woeful ignorance about the confidential nature of documents produced for the purpose of care proceedings and about how requests for disclosure should be managed. The costs incurred by the GDC and the local authority have been significant and both have been shamed by what occurred. I hope what took place in this case will not happen again.”

In a statement by the GDC, the regulator said:

“The General Dental Council (GDC) acknowledges the recent High Court judgment (The GDC v KK and Others) regarding our application for disclosure of documents from family court proceedings.

This case raised significant concerns about public confidence. We recognise that we made errors in the way that we obtained material between 2019 – 2020 and then used it at subsequent hearings including the fitness to practise hearing in early 2023.

The material was sought in good faith, in line with our statutory purpose to protect the public – but there were significant deficiencies in the way in which we went about this task.

In the judgment of the High Court, it was noted that this was because of genuine error and deficiency of understanding  in relevant teams handling this material, in respect of the nature of family court proceedings, rather than bad faith on behalf of either the GDC – who sought the material – or the local authority who provided it.

Since this error became apparent, we put controls in place to ensure that it is not repeated, and destroyed all documents and data that we were not permitted to have, and launched a programme of training and education for staff. 

“We take our responsibilities regarding the gathering and handling of sensitive information very seriously and have provided unreserved apologies to the Court and the individual concerned in respect of our failings in this case.

“We will continue to embed the measures that we have put in place to ensure that our approach to seeking disclosure of important material is conducted in line with the relevant legislative regimes to ensure that we can effectively protect the public and maintain confidence in the dental profession.” 

Disclaimer: The accuracy and information of news stories published on this website is accurate on the date of publishing. We endeavour to update stories if information change. You can contact us with change and update requests. Where possible, we will link to sources. Content on this website is for guidance purposes only. We cannot accept any responsibility or liability whatsoever for any action taken, or not taken. You should seek the appropriate legal advice having regard to your own particular circumstances.