The High Court has dismissed an appeal brought by a registered nurse and midwife against a decision of the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) Fitness to Practise Committee in Asiedu-Baning v Nursing and Midwifery Council [2026] EWHC 1936 (Admin).
The appeal concerned findings of misconduct, dishonesty and current impairment arising from the appellant’s clinical practice while working as an agency midwife at Milton Keynes Hospital in November 2017.
The allegations included inaccurate clinical record-keeping, recording observations that had not been undertaken, administering medication to a newborn without clinical justification or being able to identify the medication administered, and acting dishonestly in relation to patient records.
The Fitness to Practise Committee heard the case over an extended period, during which numerous procedural applications and case management issues were considered before the panel reached its final determination.
On appeal to the Administrative Court, the appellant challenged both the conduct of the proceedings and the substantive findings. The grounds of appeal included allegations that the proceedings had become unfair because of delay, that the case should have been stayed as an abuse of process, that certain factual findings were unsupported by the evidence, and that the sanction imposed was disproportionate.
The High Court dismissed the appeal, concluding that the Fitness to Practise Committee had been entitled to reach its findings on the evidence before it.
The Court held that the panel had correctly directed itself on the applicable burden and standard of proof and that its findings of fact and assessments of witness credibility were open to it on the evidence. It also rejected the procedural challenges, finding that the panel’s case management decisions did not render the proceedings unfair.
In relation to the length of the proceedings, the Court found that although the hearing had been protracted, much of the delay resulted from the complexity of the case and the numerous applications made during the course of the proceedings. It concluded that the appellant had received a fair hearing.
The Court also upheld the panel’s findings on impairment and confirmed that there was no basis for interfering with the sanction imposed.
Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed and the decision of the Nursing and Midwifery Council Fitness to Practise Committee remains in force.
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.
Restoration Courses
Courses suitable for any health and social care practitioner who is considering making an application for restoration back onto the register.
Insight & Remediation
Courses that are suitable for any healthcare practitioner who is facing an investigation or hearing at work or before their regulatory body.
Probity, Ethics & Professionalism
Courses designed for those facing a complaint involving in part or in whole honesty, integrity and /or professionalism.
Recent Comments