GDC erasure

David Black (Registration No: 43666) appeared before the dental regulator’s Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) in June 2012 and faced allegations of failing to have had indemnity insurance in place for more than 30 years.

The PCC took the decision that erasure was the only appropriate and proportionate outcome.

Black appealed that decision and on April 30, 2013 his case was heard by the Court of Session.

The ‘Opinion of the Court’ was delivered by Lord Bracadale and it took the view that the PCC’s decision was correct.

Paragraphs 23 and 24 of the judgement said:

"Nonetheless, the fact that Parliament has considered it appropriate to introduce legislation making the requirement for insurance a statutory requirement is indicative of how
seriously the matter is taken.

It seems clear to us that, at the latest by 1997, it was plain that the requirement for insurance cover was mandatory.  In our opinion, the committee was entitled to conclude that the General Dental Council had been clear in its guidance since November 1997 that membership of a defence organisation or indemnity insurance was obligatory.  Having regard to the specialist nature of the committee we are unable to criticise its conclusion that the requirement was a mandatory ethical requirement and that a majority of the profession would find such a lack of membership or indemnity insurance deplorable.  The committee was entitled to conclude that as the appellant had treated patients while disregarding the respondent’s standards on this point his actions amounted to misconduct.  Before us that was accepted on behalf of the appellant."