Tom Orpin-Massey was instructed by Kasir Ahmed of the GDC to respond to an appeal by the appellant against a 12 month suspension order imposed by the Professional Conduct Committee against his registration.
In short, the registrant had made comments that were found to be sexually motivated to a junior colleague. In addition, he had a recent fitness to practise history of like misconduct.
A key submission by the appellant on appeal was that the GDC’s mandate of “public protection” did not include colleagues, but only applied to patients. The GDC disagreed, and argued that members of the public also included colleagues and visitors to any dental practice.
Mrs Justice Foster DBE agreed with the Council and dismissed the appeal. In her ruling, which can be accessed below, she stated:
"39. Any submission to the effect that “the public interest” does not encompass work colleagues is given a complete answer, in my judgement, by the Respondent. The analysis of what is comprehended by the notion of public interest, by Mr Orpin-Massey in his skeleton argument is, in my judgement, correct. He states that the Appellant’s submission, essentially, equates public safety with patient safety and that there is some notional difference between a case involving a patient and a case involving a work colleague. The point was not pressed on behalf of Mr Alberts but I observe there is nothing of substance in that submission. Public safety includes patients, colleagues and visitors in the context of dental practice. As was said by the Respondent, if it was Parliament’s intention that the GDC existed solely to protect patient safety, then the overarching objective might have been stated in those terms, but Parliament mandated the Council to protect the public. That is a broad interpretation and it is a broad interpretation that has been given by the underlying materials promulgated by the GDC which I have set out above. Plainly the interests of fellow professionals and staff is comprehended in the public interest.”
The PDF of the ruling can be accessed here: Alberts v General Dental Council.pdf
Tom Orpin-Massey