I've been keeping busy recently with reviews and restoration applications.  One case of note, it pains me to say, was my first unsuccessful restoration application.  It was terrible to hear the panel announce the result, and if it was bad for me, then I can only imagine how bad it was for the registrant.  The panel were merciless in their criticism of the nurse and the way the nurse gave evidence, and to be fair to the panel, the evidence given by the nurse was pretty car crash in its nature: I could see the case disintegrating in front of my eyes.  This shows that even though you can have everything ship shape on paper, it is still up to you, the registrant to deliver convincing oral evidence (if evidence from you is necessary) in order to be successful in your case.  I can prepare you and take you so far, but you have to be able to answer questions from the panel and case presenter about your own case.

That has been the only real point of upset recently - otherwise it has been a string of successful substantive and interim order reviews, including overturning a suspension order in a case which involved a sting by a national newspaper, and today resisting an interim order application.  Today's hearing was an interesting one where a paramedic had prescribed or administered medication when they were not legally entitled to do so - in spite of this, we were able to argue that no suspension or conditions of practice were necessary.

Also of note, I have just taken on a GMC restoration case, which is another restoration case but this time for a struck off doctor.  That case will be heard next year and I will update my blog with the result.

With all of my hearings by video, not only are we able to stay safe but in my view, they are a lot less stressful for the clients.  Not stress-free by any means, but definitely better than face to face hearings.

We will see how the hearings pan out of the next few months!