[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales Care Standards Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Care Standards Tribunal >> Blanchard v General Social Care Council [2005] EWCST 436(GSCC) (10 March 2005) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCST/2005/436(GSCC).html Cite as: [2005] EWCST 436(GSCC)

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

Blanchard v General Social Care Council [2005] EWCST 436(GSCC) (10 March 2005)

C.R.Blanchard -v- General Social Care Council
[2005] 436.GSCC
DECISION ON APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT UNDER REG 4A
-Before- His Honour Judge David Pearl (President) Ms E Fowler Ms P.McLoughlin
On Monday 7^th March 2005.
1. The Applicant lodged an appeal on 9^th January 2005 against the decision of the Registration Committee of the General Social Care Council. The Registration Committee had decided on 10^th December 2004 to refuse the application for registration in the part of the Social Care Register relating to social workers. The Committee was satisfied that the Applicant had not successfully completed a course or requirements for training as approved by the GSCC and as set out in Schedule 1 of the Registration Rules (2003).
2. The Applicant has a Certificate in the Residential Care of Children and Young People (CRCCYP) from what was at the time Newcastle Upon Tyne Polytechnic. This is not a qualification listed in Schedule 1.
3. The Committee was not satisfied that the Applicant had successfully completed a course or requirements for training and, in its reasons, said it did not have a discretion to grant registration with conditions.
4. In its Response to the Appeal, the Respondent states that the Tribunal has no option but to dismiss the appeal, if it went to a full hearing, as it has no power to overturn the Council's Registration Rules, and that as the appeal was bound to fail, the appeal should be struck out at this stage under Reg 4A(b) as being misconceived.
5. The Tribunal heard the strike out application on the 7^th March 2005 when the Respondent was represented by Ms S. Cole and Mr A. Skidmore, and the Applicant appeared in person.
6. Mr Skidmore told us that after 1^st April 2005, all Independent Reviewing Officers had to be registered as social workers, but that this policy decision was taken by the Department for Education and Skills (see The Review of Children's Cases (Amendment) (England) Regs 2004 SI 1419 amending the 1991 Regulations to insert Reg 2A(2): "The independent reviewing officer must be registered as a social worker in a register maintained by the GSCC under s 56 of the Care Standards Act 2000.")
7. Regulation 4(7)(c) of the General Social Care Council (Registration) Rules 2003 made in exercise of powers granted by s 57,58,59,60,63,65,and 71 of the Care Standards Act 2000 makes clear that the Council shall not grant an application for registration unless it is satisfied, inter alia, that the Applicant has successfully completed a course or requirement for training as approved by the Council and set out in Schedule 1.
8. As the Applicant does not have these qualifications, the appeal is bound to fail, and therefore the strike out application must succeed under Regulation 4A(1)(b) as being misconceived.
9. The Applicant's dispute is with the list as set out in the Schedule. This is not a matter on which the Tribunal has a role to play.
10. Whilst striking out the application, we wish to comment that the "appearance" of a right of appeal in such circumstances as the present case is unfortunate. It is not helpful in our view to send to an Applicant a notice of decision informing him of a right to appeal to the Care Standards Tribunal when it is obvious to the Respondent that such a right of appeal in the circumstances of this case is meaningless.
11. There will be cases where the Tribunal will have to exercise a fact finding role where an Applicant challenges the view that he or she has not obtained a qualification as set out in Schedule 1 and where he or she states that he or she has obtained such a qualification. This is not such a case.
12. It may well be necessary for the Council, in the light of this case, to reconsider its Notices of Decision to Refuse Registration in situations where the Applicant concedes that he or she does not possess the qualification as set out in Schedule 1.

APPEAL AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE REGISTRATION COMMITTEE OF THE GSCC DATED 14^th DECEMBER 2004 TO REFUSE REGISTRATION AS A SOCIAL WORKER, STRUCK OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH REG 4A(1)(b) AS MISCONCEIVED.

ORDER ACCORDINGLY

His Honour Judge David Pearl

(President)

Ms E Fowler

Ms P McLoughlin

10^th March 2005.