-
![Bhatti v. Darlington NHS Trust [2026] EWHC 1079 (KB)](https://trustsbarrister.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/img_0655.jpg?w=903)
Bhatti v. Darlington NHS Trust [2026] EWHC 1079 (KB)
Read more: Bhatti v. Darlington NHS Trust [2026] EWHC 1079 (KB)No injunctive relief where a surgeon’s practice is restricted to non-clinical/administrative work, even though ‘there are strong grounds to submit that the effect…. on the Claimant was tantamount to an exclusion’ where the Trust’s decision was ‘founded on patient safety and probity considerations that are, and remain, of fundamental importance…’: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/kb/2026/1079
-
![GMC v. Gilbert & Anor [2026] EWCA Civ 53](https://trustsbarrister.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/img_0635.jpg?w=817)
GMC v. Gilbert & Anor [2026] EWCA Civ 53
Read more: GMC v. Gilbert & Anor [2026] EWCA Civ 53Where ‘a judge has identified that there were factors which the MPT wrongly left out of account when they decided that suspension was a sufficient sanction’ it is not ‘incumbent upon him to explain why those factors did not move the appropriate sanction across the threshold from suspension to erasure’: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/civ/2026/53
-
![Anaesthetists Utd, R v. GMC [2025] EWHC 2270](https://trustsbarrister.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/img_0635.jpg?w=817)
Anaesthetists Utd, R v. GMC [2025] EWHC 2270
Read more: Anaesthetists Utd, R v. GMC [2025] EWHC 2270While Physician Associates (PAs) and Anaesthesia Associates (AAs) are currently only advised ‘to say that they are not medically qualified if they are engaged in a task or function that a patient might reasonably expect a doctor to perform’, and despite there being ‘ample evidence that patients and the wider public do not know or…