The National Health Service (General Medical Services Supplementary List) Regulations 2001

Criteria for removal

11.—(1) Where a Health Authority is considering whether to remove a doctor using the power in regulation 10(4)(c) (an unsuitability case), it shall consider the information from the doctor in the form of a declaration supplied under regulation 9, and must apply the criteria set out in paragraph (2).

(2) The criteria referred to in paragraph (1) are—

(a) the nature of any offence, investigation or incident;

(b) the length of time since any such offence was committed, and since any criminal conviction or investigation;

(c) whether there are other criminal offences to be considered;

(d) the penalty imposed on any criminal conviction or the outcome of any investigation;

(e) the relevance of any criminal offence or investigation into professional conduct on the provision by him of general medical services and the likely risk to patients;

(f) whether any criminal offence was a sexual offence to which Part I of the Sexual Offences Act 1997(1) applies;

(g) whether the doctor has been refused admittance to, conditionally included, removed, contingently removed or is currently suspended from other Health Authority lists or equivalent lists, and if so, what the facts were in those cases and what were the reasons given by the Health Authority or equivalent body in the case; and

(h) whether he was at the time, has in the preceding six months been, or was at the time of the originating events a director of a body corporate which was refused admittance to, conditionally included, removed or contingently removed from other Health Authority lists or equivalent lists, or is currently suspended from such lists, and if so, what the facts were in those cases and what were the reasons given by the Health Authority or equivalent body in the case.

(3) Where a Health Authority is considering removal of a doctor under regulation 10(4)(b), a fraud case, it shall consider the information from the practitioner in the form of a declaration supplied under regulation 9, and must apply the criteria set out in paragraph (4).

(4) The criteria referred to in paragraph (3) are—

(a) the nature of the incidents of any fraud case;

(b) the length of time since any incident occurred, and since the investigation was concluded;

(c) whether there are other incidents of fraud cases or other criminal offences to be considered;

(d) any action taken by any licensing, regulatory or other body, the police or the courts as a result of the incident;

(e) the relevance of the investigation to the provision by him of general medical services and the likely risk to patients or to public finances;

(f) whether the doctor has been refused admittance to, conditionally included, removed, contingently removed or is currently suspended from other Health Authority lists or equivalent lists, and if so, what the facts were in those cases and what were the reasons given by the Health Authority or equivalent body in the case;

(g) whether he was at the time, has in the preceding six months been, or was at the time of the originating events a director of a body corporate which was refused admittance to, conditionally included, removed or contingently removed from other Health Authority lists or equivalent lists, or is currently suspended from such lists, and if so, what the facts were in those cases and what were the reasons given by the Health Authority or equivalent body in the case.

(5) Where a Health Authority is considering removal of a doctor under regulation 10(4)(a), an efficiency case, it shall consider the information from the practitioner in the form of a declaration supplied under regulation 9, and must apply the criteria set out in paragraph (6).

(6) The criteria referred to in paragraph (5) are—

(a) whether it was prejudicial to the efficiency of the general medical services provided by the doctor;

(b) the length of time since any incident occurred, and since the investigation was concluded;

(c) any action taken by any licensing, regulatory or other body, the police or the courts as a result of any such incident;

(d) the nature of the incident and whether there is a likely risk to patients;

(e) whether the doctor has ever failed to comply with a request by the Health Authority to undertake an assessment by the NCAA;

(f) whether the doctor has previously failed to make a declaration or comply with an undertaking required by these Regulations;

(g) whether the doctor has been refused admittance to, conditionally included, removed, contingently removed or is currently suspended from other Health Authority lists or equivalent lists, and if so, what the facts were in those cases and what were the reasons given by the Health Authority or equivalent body in the case;

(h) whether he was at the time, has in the preceding six months been, or was at the time of the originating events a director of a body corporate which was refused admittance to, conditionally included, removed or contingently removed from other Health Authority lists or equivalent lists, or is currently suspended from such lists, and if so, what the facts were in those cases and what were the reasons given by the Health Authority or equivalent body in the case.

(7) In making any decision under regulation 10, the Health Authority shall take into account the overall effect of any relevant incidents and offences relating to the doctor of which it is aware, whichever condition it relies on.

(8) When making a decision on any condition in regulation 10, the Health Authority shall state in its decision on which condition it relies.

(1)

1997 c. 51.