Proportionality
Proportionality
The Guidance makes plain that a tribunal should have regard to the principle of proportionality (para 20). In order to ensure that the sanction is proportionate, a tribunal should consider the sanctions available, starting with the least restrictive. It should weigh the interests of the public against those of the doctor (para 20). However, once the tribunal has determined that a certain sanction is necessary to protect the public (and is the minimum required to do so), that sanction must be imposed, even where this may lead to difficulties for a doctor. This approach flows from the legal duty to protect the public (para 21).
The Guidance states at para 17:
“Although the tribunal should make sure the sanction it imposes is appropriate and proportionate, the reputation of the profession as a whole is more important than the interests of any individual doctor.”
- Heading
- Introduction
- Legal framework
- Sanctions guidance
- Proportionality
- Mitigating and aggravating factors
- Treatment of criminal convictions
- Suspension
- Erasure
- GMC Policy: Good Medical Practice
- The facts
- Proceedings before the MPT
- Remorse
- Insight
- Risk of repetition
- Impairment
- Sanction
- Appellant’s overarching submissions
- The approach of the Guidance to violent offences
- MPT’s approach to insight and remorse
- Ground 1: Failure to balance aggravating and mitigating factors appropriately
- Ground 2: Failure to apply the Guidance and precedents correctly
- Other cases
- Guidance
- Public perception
- Ground 3: Error in the determination of sanction
- Seriousness of offending
- Insight and remediation
- Conclusions
![AC-2025-CDF-000062 - [2025] EWHC 2619 (Admin)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_fi51A75.png)