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

I think it will help those reading this judgment if I set out, in a summary, the chronology of the key findings of fact of the Panel interspersed with some of the documents and witness evidence. I do not summarise it all. The hearing lasted many weeks and had been adjourned twice before it even started. After it was started and evidence was taken it was again adjourned, part heard, for many months, because Ms A’s mobile phone records were provided to the Panel by the police, rather late.

Ms A came from Nigeria to the UK on a visa to do a thesis at Glasgow university in 2017. Her father (Prof. G) knew Dr Foy and his father. In the spring of 2018 Ms A was advised by Prof. G to go to Dr Foy’s house in Blackpool for help with her ill-health. Prof. G called Dr Foy and asked him to treat her. She stayed at Dr Foy’s house for 2 days in May 2018 and he admitted her to his department, examined her, arranged scans and tests at his hospital in Blackpool. TB was the likely diagnosis. She ended up in Glasgow hospital for a month between June and July 2018 receiving antibiotics for TB. Ms A asserted later, to her sister, that something untoward happened one night during that stay in May 2018 with Dr Foy. Later still she asserted that he tried to cosy up to her on the sofa and got an erection, (Dr Foy denied the this). No charges were made against him relating to this. In messages after that stay HIV testing for Ms A was discussed and he described her as beautiful, pretty and gorgeous and asked about her boyfriends. He visited her in Glasgow Hospital.

In November 2018, Ms A went to stay with Dr Foy again, this time for 7 days (14-21^st). The reasons Ms A gave for the stay were not consistent. Dr Foy asserted that she came for his 50^th birthday party and the vitamin D test was arranged after she arrived. The Panel found that she was ill, needed medical help and that he arranged a blood test for vitamin D deficiency and (inter alia) an HIV test. The blood test was done on 15^th November. He had a “surprise” birthday party with colleagues on 17^th November 2018. She attended and was photographed with her arm around him. The vitamin D results came back on 20^th November and he then sent messages to Ms A on 20^th suggesting “sex” or a kiss in compensation for the advice he had given to obtain a vitamin D test which did show a deficiency (he said that was a joke but in cross examination accepted it was a foolish and wholly inappropriate text). The Panel found that on the evening of 20^th November Dr Foy came into Ms A’s room late in the evening and invited her into his bedroom to look at flowcharts on his laptop. Ms A went voluntarily into his bedroom and stayed, on her evidence, about an hour, sitting on the bed with him. At around midnight, when she got up to leave, he suggested she stay the night with him (implying sex) and touched her breast. She rebuked him and he apologised the next day. (Dr Foy denied the bedroom incident entirely and gave an account of her wearing a t-shirt in the sitting room and no leggings, to which he objected).

On 2^nd December 2018 the Panel found that Ms A had asked Dr Foy for a lift from London back to Blackpool as part of her journey to Glasgow and he drove her up in his new Maserati. They left at 7 pm and arrived at midnight. She stayed over at his house. They ended up lying on the sofa, Dr Foy with his legs apart and she lying between his legs with her body on his pelvis and her head on his abdomen. They both agreed that much. A cushion was involved. He touched her breast, and she objected (he denied that). He then got up and leant over and started to kiss her, she objected (he admitted only a peck on her cheek to get her off him). He then overwhelmed, undressed and forcibly raped her (ejaculating inside her with no condom). He then begged his apology upstairs in her room and begged her not to report him. Ms A did not flee his house. He apologised again the next day and told her not to worry because he had had a vasectomy. He paid for her train fare up to Glasgow and drove her to the train station. He denied the Sofa Incident. The Panel rejected Dr Foy’s account and accepted Ms A’s account.

On the day after the rape Ms A went to the cinema with a man friend and photos were taken showing her looking happy. 4 days later Ms A was assessed as “bright in mood” on 7.12.20218 by Nurse UL at the TB clinic. Ms A made no complaint to her boyfriend, her family, her wider friends, or the police about sexual assault or rape until 23.12.2018. In a phone call with her brother (O) in the morning of that day, she asserted that Dr Foy had sexually assaulted her in December 2018.

O called Dr Foy twice that day and later produced a much-edited transcript of the calls. The Panel made findings about which transcript was for which call but, in any event, during the calls Dr Foy was contrite, apologetic and accepted that he could go to prison for what he had done to Ms A. Rape was not in the discussion on 23.12.2018 because Ms A had only disclosed sexual assault to O and she had specifically denied that Dr Foy had put his penis in her vagina (her words in a message to O). Dr Foy asserted that after the first call in which he said he had denied any wrongdoing, he thought he might be being blackmailed so he “went along” with the whole thing and made admissions in the second call to see what demands were coming. The Panel did not find that explanation persuasive and considered that his admissions were evidence of his sexual wrongdoing.

The transcripts of the edits of the two calls show the following.

By 20.57 hours on 23.12.2018, O was informing Dr Foy by messaging that he had discussed the matter extensively with other people and believed the assault had to be reported to Prof. G. The second call happened after that time and after Dr Foy came home from work.

As the day of 23.12.2018 progressed, O asked Ms A to write her version of events down and she did, in what was called version one (V1). In that Ms A recited the May 2018 erection on the sofa event, the Bedroom Incident which she asserted occurred in December and an “attempted rape” on 2^nd December 2018 – the Sofa Incident. O then tidied V1 up that night (deleting that Ms A had told her sister about the May erection event and adding the sexually suggestive messages sent by Dr Foy to Ms A in November) into what was called “V2” and sent it to Ms A on 24.12.2018.

On 24.12.2018, O demanded money from Dr Foy as compensation, by messages, under what the Panel was told was a longstanding tradition of family civil resolution in Nigeria. Initially he sought £20,000 (later, after Ms A changed her allegation to rape on 28.12.2018, he sought £100,000).

By 26.12.2018, V3 was produced by Ms A and O (including mentioning the vitamin D test for the first time and correcting the date of the Bedroom Incident to November 2018).

Although, in her evidence, Ms A asserted that she went to a family friend for Christmas in 2018, the Panel found that she went after Christmas and stayed with the friendly family who knew her father. I shall call the father in that family Mr X (although he was called Dr F before the Panel). The Panel found that Ms A disclosed to Mr X that she had been raped. Thereafter her own father, Prof. G, was told that it was a rape allegation that same day, 28.12.2028.

The Panel was told that on 26.12.2018, on with the advice of Dr Edjohwomu, Dr Foy decided to fly to Nigeria to talk to Prof. G. He did so and that conversation occurred on 28.12.2018 in the presence of Dr Foy’s brother, a barrister. The Panel rejected Dr Foy’s and his brother’s assertions that he went to complain to Prof. G that his children were blackmailing him. The meeting led to Prof. G requiring Dr Foy to email to him a signed version of a document drafted by Prof. G making an admission, apology and an offer of compensation. This was agreed to and sent by Dr Foy on 29.12.2018 (see BP157). In it, Dr Foy admitted “inappropriate behaviour” towards Ms A, he regretted his action and the pain and distress caused and asked for forgiveness. He agreed to comply with “any financial request” to pay Ms A but sought guidance on figures. On 30.12.2018 Prof. G asked Dr Foy to sign an amended admission including the words “forced rape”. Dr Foy never signed or agreed to that. V4 of Ms A’s statement was produced on 30.12.2018 and for the first time, in all of the versions, she asserted rape in writing.

On 31.12.2018 Ms A went to the police and, without handing over any of the written versions, asserted that Dr Foy had raped her. A handwritten statement was taken. No mention was made of the Bedroom Incident. On 1.1.2019 Ms A was interviewed by the police. She set out the May 2018 event as a sexual advance and the Bedroom Incident (touched my breast) and then the Sofa Incident (rape).

Dr Foy was arrested on 2.1.2018. He was accused of sexual assault during the Bedroom Incident and rape during the Sofa Incident. He gave a police interview on 3.1.2019. He was 50 years old. He was under caution. He provided a handwritten pre-prepared statement. It dealt with the allegation of sexual assault. We wrote that Prof. G had asked him to help Ms A with her medical treatment. He accepted that she came for that help to his house in May 2018. He asserted she came again in November 2018 for his 50th birthday party. For the Sofa Incident he accepted she came and sat between his legs and leaned over him. He felt pressure on his abdomen, so he tried to get up. He gave her a peck on the cheek, and she said “stop”, so he stopped. He went to the loo returned and sat and Ms A came to “rest” on him. He felt “uncomfortable” and tried to get her to get up. She got up and said, “what’s this all about” and went upstairs. He went up to ask what was wrong. She asked why he was trying to kiss her. He alleges that she also said, “how much are you going to pay me?” In the interview, he recited his evidence about the Bedroom Incident. He initially made no comment about the allegations. He denied their relationship was sexual or that he wanted it to be sexual. He refused to answer if he had ever discussed having sex with her. He admitted sending a “jokey” message to her in November 2018 asking for a kiss and sex after he got the vitamin D deficiency result. Later that day Ms A had nothing to wear so asked for a t-shirt, so she came into his bedroom, and he gave her a t-shirt. Later he bought her tablets after the vitamin D result came back. They went together to get them. As for the later Bedroom Incident, he denied it, he denied touching her breast that night. His version of events was that she came downstairs wearing only the t-shirt and bent down in the sitting room wearing only the t-shirt and no leggings and then lay on the sofa and put her naked legs on him. Dr Foy told Ms A he was uncomfortable and went upstairs, then came back down and told her had just had an erection and he did not like her doing that. Ms A apologised, changed and came back down. She left the next morning. As for the Sofa Incident on 2.12.2018 Dr Foy asserted that Ms A had asked him to drive her up because the travel was too expensive. He did so. During the journey Ms A asked him “how was sex?” When they got to his home she came and lay between his legs on the sofa. Her head was on his abdomen. He asked her to get up and she did not, so he gave her a peck on the cheek. He went to the toilet, returned, they sat on the sofa and Ms A leaned up against him again, to his side. He was uncomfortable and told her he was going upstairs. Then she responded violently. Later, he went to her room, and she asked him why he was trying to kiss her. She asked how much he was going to pay her. He was shocked.

O gave a witness statement to the police on 8.3.2019. He informed them that in a call on 23.12.2018 Ms A disclosed that Dr Foy had made sexual advances to her before and assaulted her during the Sofa Incident but stopped short of rape. He obtained Dr Foy’s number from his sister. In the call he questioned Dr Foy about what had happened. Dr Foy apologised, said his actions were out of character and he did not know what came over him and admitted that, if the case went to the police, he would lose his medical licence and potentially go to jail. He pleaded for forgiveness. O made a secret recording of the call. O later contacted a friend and took advice from a lawyer who recommended reporting to the police. He did not mention two calls.

Prof. G gave a police witness statement on 6.5.2019. O had called him on 27.12.2018. He was then sent the recording of Dr Foy’s admissions of sexual assault in a phone call with O and one of the written versions of Ms A’s account. Later Prof. G called his daughter (Ms A) and she admitted it was rape not just sexual assault. He called Mr X and found out that Ms A had told him too. On 28.12.2018 Dr Foy and his brother visited Prof. G in Nigeria to apologise in person. He confessed to sexually assaulting Ms A. He admitted the Sofa Incident up to and before taking off her trousers but denied penetration. Prof. G asserted Dr Foy wrote a Whatsapp apology that evening and on 29.12.2018 wrote an email drafted by Prof. G admitting inappropriate behaviour, apologising and offering compensation. Prof. G then sought an admission of rape, but Dr Foy did not agree, instead the UK police asked both families to cease communicating.