[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions >> Nursing and Midwifery Council v Pikuda [2012] EWHC 2439 (Admin) (15 August 2012) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2012/2439.html Cite as: [2012] EWHC 2439 (Admin)

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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

		Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL
		15th August 2012

1. MRS JUSTICE DOBBS: The applicant seeks an extension of 6 months of an interim suspension order made on 18th February 2011, under Article 31(8) of the Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001.
2. The respondent has sent in a signed consent order indicating that she does not intend to attend the hearing nor does she oppose the application. However, the court must itself ensure that the order should properly continue.
3. The respondent came to the attention of the applicant on 1st July 2010, following referral by Barchester Healthcare in relation to a number of allegations with regard to the care of two residents at the Paternoster Care Home. There are two allegations relating to failure to take proper steps in the care of a patient who suffered from dementia and a failure to keep adequate records.
4. The case was sent for investigation on 7th February 2011. There were delays due to administrative reasons and also problems obtaining the necessary evidence. On 8th June 2012 the Investigation Committee decided that there was a case to answer and referred the case to the Conduct and Competence Committee. Since the imposition of the interim suspension order there have been regular interim order hearings. The respondent has had some limited engagement with the NMC but has not attended any of the hearings. She sent emails to the effect that she did not wish to attend and had retired from the profession. The NMC is still waiting to hear as to whether she requires a hearing or meeting and, depending on that decision, certain procedural steps will be required. A date for hearing has not been sent therefore. The case is linked to that of two others and a hearing therefore will not be for some time.
5. The court has to consider the same criteria as the Panel did, namely protection of the public, other public interest and, in relevant cases, protection of the Registrant.
6. Having read all the papers, I am satisfied that the order as it stands is appropriate, proportionate and necessary for the protection of the public. Even though the respondent has indicated that she intends to retire, the order is necessary to ensure that there is no change of mind and to put the mind of the public at rest. The Committee considered the allegations were serious ones, involving as they did fundamental nursing practice.
7. I am satisfied therefore that it is appropriate to extend this order for a further 6 months.