Proceedings concerning professional performance of doctor should not be conducted in private

Medical council – intended proceedings – doctor who was subject of an investigation by the Council’s Fitness to Practise Committee (FTPC) - recommended that the doctor be censured - recommended that the doctor’s registration be subject to a series of conditions – Council decided that the appropriate sanction should be conditional registration – hearings were all conducted in private – asked the Court to hear proceedings in camera – sought directions to appraise the doctor’s patients – court concludes that the application should be heard in open court - ensure the anonymity of the doctor and of the relevant patients - doctor was suffering from an opioid addiction - in order to feed his addiction, he was prescribing unnecessary opioids to patients, administering doses to them of part only of the dispensed opioids and administering the remainder to himself - two separate applications the FTPC – patient complaint – self-referral - FTPC Inquiry - Council hearing - legal position – powers to hear matters in camera - doctor’s identity should be protected but I do not believe that a full in camera hearing is necessary in order to do so – unfair to publish patient’s identity but full in camera hearing not necessary - public interest in having an open hearing – Council is authorised in the public interest to advise the doctor’s patients - Council is empowered to advise the public at large of the relevant material then it must follow that it is entitled to do so to a limited constituency of the public.