AC-2025-LON-000408 - [2025] EWHC 2846 (Admin)

Dr Foy submitted that at J136 the Panel did not explain what they meant by the words “advice … that it should not have pre-conceived notions as to how a victim of sexual assault will react.” In submissions Mr Bennett stated this was a circular argument. The Panel would: (1) assume Ms A was such a victim, then (2) look at what she did after the Sofa Incident, and if it showed she was distressed or made a complaint then this supported her credibility, but (3) if she was happy (cinema or TB nurse notes) that was ignored, so (4) the Panel’s approach was faulted. Dr Foy then relied on the inconsistencies and implausibilities set out under Grounds 1 and 2 above.

The GMC responded by pointing to the advice given to the Panel by the LQC on how to approach what complainants do after sexual assault, about which Dr Foy did not complain. This plainly did apply to the cinema photos of 3.12.2018 and the Panel were right not to place too much weight on that. The GMC pointed out that the Panel have considered all of Dr Foy’s points about Ms A’s credibility, and pointed out, for instance, her stern rebuke of Dr Foy after the Bedroom Incident.