McDaid v NMC (unreported, 22 May 2014), Blake JThe submission by a nurse, M, of a fabricated letter to the High Court in an appeal against the finding of the NMC's Conduct and Competence Committee
McDaid v NMC (unreported, 22 May 2014), Blake J
The submission by a nurse, M, of a fabricated letter to the High Court in an appeal against the finding of the NMC's Conduct and Competence Committee ('CCC') amounted to a contempt of court.
In this as yet unreported decision, the High Court took the unusual step of directing that the NMC bring the appellant back before the Court for contempt proceedings (which could result in a prison sentence). In March 2012 M was struck off by the CCC in relation to allegations of breach of confidentiality, dishonesty, unprofessional and aggressive behaviour and sending aggressive and inappropriate correspondence to various individuals. M's case was that she was a whistleblower and as a result had been targeted as part of a conspiracy by her managers. In March 2013, M successfully appealed the decision (McDaid v Nursing and Midwifery Council No. 1 [2013] EWHC 586) and relied on fresh evidence, namely a letter from the hospital where she worked that was potentially crucial evidence in relation to a number of the allegations. The High Court found that the letter potentially threw a completely new light on all of the charges against M and therefore quashed the decision and referred the matter to a new CCC.
Following the referral back, the NMC conducted an investigation that raised concerns that the letter was not genuine. M was therefore made subject to additional allegations that she had fabricated the letter. The CCC ultimately found that the letter had been dishonestly fabricated by M in an attempt to mislead it. On appeal, M submitted that the panel's conclusion that she herself had written the letter was unsustainable. The High Court found that the panel's decision that M had fabricated the letter was 'plainly right'. Interestingly, the court further held that M's submission of the letter in the 2013 appeal amounted to either a contempt of court or an abuse of the process of the court and that the NMC should bring the matter back before the court to be dealt with. While there are likely to be few occasions where individuals submit false documents to the higher courts for the purpose of appeals, the decision is a salutary warning that the courts regard the integrity of their proceedings with the utmost seriousness and that abuses or contempt of those proceedings are likely to be dealt with severely. By virtue of M's actions, what was originally a disciplinary matter leading to her no longer being able to practise as a nurse has become even more serious and could even result in a sentence of imprisonment. We will provide an update on any developments in due course.
The submission by a nurse, M, of a fabricated letter to the High Court in an appeal against the finding of the NMC's Conduct and Competence Committee ('CCC') amounted to a contempt of court.
In this as yet unreported decision, the High Court took the unusual step of directing that the NMC bring the appellant back before the Court for contempt proceedings (which could result in a prison sentence). In March 2012 M was struck off by the CCC in relation to allegations of breach of confidentiality, dishonesty, unprofessional and aggressive behaviour and sending aggressive and inappropriate correspondence to various individuals. M's case was that she was a whistleblower and as a result had been targeted as part of a conspiracy by her managers. In March 2013, M successfully appealed the decision (McDaid v Nursing and Midwifery Council No. 1 [2013] EWHC 586) and relied on fresh evidence, namely a letter from the hospital where she worked that was potentially crucial evidence in relation to a number of the allegations. The High Court found that the letter potentially threw a completely new light on all of the charges against M and therefore quashed the decision and referred the matter to a new CCC.
Following the referral back, the NMC conducted an investigation that raised concerns that the letter was not genuine. M was therefore made subject to additional allegations that she had fabricated the letter. The CCC ultimately found that the letter had been dishonestly fabricated by M in an attempt to mislead it. On appeal, M submitted that the panel's conclusion that she herself had written the letter was unsustainable. The High Court found that the panel's decision that M had fabricated the letter was 'plainly right'. Interestingly, the court further held that M's submission of the letter in the 2013 appeal amounted to either a contempt of court or an abuse of the process of the court and that the NMC should bring the matter back before the court to be dealt with. While there are likely to be few occasions where individuals submit false documents to the higher courts for the purpose of appeals, the decision is a salutary warning that the courts regard the integrity of their proceedings with the utmost seriousness and that abuses or contempt of those proceedings are likely to be dealt with severely. By virtue of M's actions, what was originally a disciplinary matter leading to her no longer being able to practise as a nurse has become even more serious and could even result in a sentence of imprisonment. We will provide an update on any developments in due course.