High Court uphold appeal in PSA v HCPC [2025] EWHC 164 (Admin)

The case of Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care v Health and Care Professions Council & Anor [2025] EWHC 164 (Admin) revolved around the disciplinary proceedings against Mr. Ihab Sharf (the Second Respondent), a hospital operating-department practitioner. The case was heard in the High Court of Justice, Administrative Court, presided over by Mrs. Justice Collins Rice.

Background

The Second Respondent faced professional disciplinary proceedings due to several conduct issues between November 2017 and February 2018. A disciplinary committee found his fitness to practice impaired on grounds of misconduct and imposed an 18-month Conditions of Practice (CoP) Order on him in September 2021. This order was reviewed and extended twice, with the final extension set to expire on 13th April 2024.

Key Issue

The central issue in this case was whether the CoP Order had expired when the committee convened on 3rd April 2024 to review it. The committee concluded that the order had expired on 1st April 2024, based on the language of the previous order and the HCPC’s public register entry. This decision was challenged by the Professional Standards Authority (PSA), which argued that the committee’s decision was wrong in law and insufficient for the protection of the public.

Legal Framework

The legal framework governing the HCPC and its disciplinary committees is set out in the Health Professions Order 2001. Article 30 of the 2001 Order provides for two routes to a formal committee review of a CoP Order: a mandatory review before the order expires (Article 30(1)) and a discretionary review at any time during the order’s currency (Article 30(2) and (4)). The primary duty under Article 30(1) is to ensure that an order does not expire without being reviewed, with the law providing for seamless consecutiveness of the order’s period.

Court’s Analysis

Mrs. Justice Collins Rice found that the committee convened on 1st December 2023 had been exercising its functions under Article 30(1) and that the seamless consecutiveness provision of Article 30(1)(a) applied. The committee’s decision on 1st December 2023 to extend the CoP Order for four months was effective from the expiry of the previous order on 13th December 2023, meaning the extended order ran until 13th April 2024.

The court concluded that the committee convened on 3rd April 2024 was wrong to determine that the order had expired on 1st April 2024 and that it had no jurisdiction to conduct a review. The decision was found to be wrong in law and insufficient for the protection of the public, as it allowed the conditions of practice imposed on Mr. Sharf to lapse without a proper review.

The court allowed the PSA’s appeal, finding that the committee’s decision on 3rd April 2024 was wrong in law and insufficient for the protection of the public.

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.