Short Summary: 

After 5 High Court Appeals to end the silly cycles, currently at Court of appeal including seeking permission to appeal. As expected having won the previous High Court Appeal the Racist Medical Council (GMC) tribunal was pre-determined against natural justice, refused to follow their own rules, proceeded on the basis guilty till proven innocent as unfairness to the doctor is paramount, refused consider new GMC witness information admitting all disclosures were made in writing before the 8 June 2020 but unexpectedly: GMC tribunal of Miss Temple-Bones, Dr Ian Crighton and Paul Hepworth used race and whistleblowing as aggravating factors. The same High Court judge did not read defence submissions, transcripts and did not consider arguments including GMC use of hallucinating AI, but adopted GMC submissions and refused to consider the GMC-Barristers (Peter Mant and Ian Brooks) objective repeated dishonesty which ironically was an accepted as fact in GMC tribunal stage 1. There are strong arguments and grounds especially as the GMC Charlie Massey is again refusing FtP Rule 12. Grounds:

1. The GMC refused to apply the first limb of Ivey v Genting Casino test, by choosing their own preferred external events rather than making positive findings of my state of mind and objective evidence.

2. The GMC refused to engage with the fact their own witness NHS Manager Miss Natalie Burbidge admitted all disclosures made and understood at the time including major disclosures with brief disclosure statement (that Judge Eyre repeatedly actively ignores)

3. The GMC for insight conflated and substituted extensive 5 years of evidence of current Fitness to Practice (FtP) as a doctor (stage 2) with their white-colonial stance that any current criticism against white supremacy/GMC is a lack of insight despite being unrelated to the practice of medicine or GMC-changing accusations.

Long version of summary: 

The GMC previously manufactured dishonesty in 2019 by stating factually in 2016 when I provided my future employer a Brief Disclosure statement post-whistleblowing against the GMC of potential-pending future GMC problems; that I did not tell them in 2016 that a GMC investigation started in 2017 (obviously told them verbally within hours and writing within days with MPS input but had not done a ‘minority report’ the previous year). The GMC also refused to accept their own satisfactory Performance Assessment as the defence/Medical Protection Society made no submissions on the basis the GMC made no submissions and it is for the GMC to prove which they clearly did not! The GMC refused to use Rule 12 in 2019 having done so in 2017 to manufacture FtP.

The GMC now state their GMC COVID guidance does not apply to me. They actively ignore during the COVID pandemic I had 5 other jobs, when I responded to Dame Marx email to volunteer for a few hours by ‘enquiring-given-disclosures’ to ad-hoc NHS Midlands. The GMC and Mr Brooks/Mr Mant objectively lied stating I made 5 applications and obviously cannot provide one, and persistently stating I made a DBS application without receipt/payment when clearly, I made multiple declarations verbally and in writing disparaging of the GMC. The GMC with Mr Brooks and AI, deceitfully state their formal investigation for a driving conviction started before a conviction and ignore the fact I provided over 100 pages to supplement enquiries, being made by Miss Natalie Burbidge to do call-centre training, and filling out a draft ad-hoc (nationally changing) extra Disclosure declaration, clearly stating YES with an added tick, to GMC FtP problems (which is actually irrelevant to DBS) but focus on one of the 5 sentences out of context, as confusing despite clarification with the last sentence with provision of the Brief Disclosure Statement -- both the GMC and High Court Mr Justice Stephen Eyre actively ignore despite repeated presentation.

Obviously unusually I started fundraising for the Court of Appeal before the GMC tribunal re-hearing 2025 due to concerns of bad-GMC-practice that has spread to the High Court and potential lucrative quid pro-quo for those involved which undermines the public interest. The GMC FtP self-complaints were unusual and post-whistleblowing with strong overtures of racism, that I continued to clearly feel present.

The decision to appeal was made, after the prior SUCCESSFUL High Court Appeal 2024. The GMC MPTS created persistent delays, lied and the GMC having begged for costs to be reduced from £50k to £12k then ‘fraudulently’ refused to pay the court ordered sums in contempt of the HM Court and concerns the Judge-chair of the GMC MPTS was in collusion. That led to contempt of court proceedings against GMC Charlie Massey, Niaomi Roberts, Crystal Collins-Hewson for their criminal activity of contempt of court. The same Judge, HHJ Stephen Eyre in March 2025 directions hearing unusually was both silent on the GMC producing a clear fake a Bank Giro Credit Remittance with fake-dates before legal action, and allowed a Mr Mant strike-out by refusing to fairly to uphold a plain simple reading of Super Max vs Malhotra 2020 and the UK legal system natural justice whilst, not allowing the CPS to take over prosecution, stating I cannot on my own bring and criminally prosecute the pseudo-legal-GMC without being legally learned, as the law is not blind so will protect lawyers.

In April 2025, the GMC MPTS having pre-selected another all-White proven-manipulative tribunal of Miss Gillian Temple-Bone, Mr Paul Hepsorth, Mr Ian Crighton convened as a separate legal GMC MPT that started and admitted the tribunal, actively excluding defence/me. This tribunal was a step-up from the usual worshiping of the GMC FtP prosecution as they at times called Mr Brooks a silly child. However despite, being the first tribunal in 10years to grant defence applications, they were manipulative so applied the applications at the end of the tribunal which somehow Judge Eyre found procedurally satisfactory despite undermining natural justice, logic and fairness.

I made 3 applications but the two that were granted before Stage 1 was:

• It was supposedly granted, the GMC (in contradiction to the parallel insinuation of Judge Eyre) must allow new evidence in a new hearing which the GMC Ms Niaomi Roberts and Crystal Collins-Hewson had been adamant no fairness can be applied to a doctor, thus no new information from a BAME doctor. Further supposedly granted was an adverse inference to be applied to the GMC and direct review of GMC triage and investigation shenanigans (not done)
• Given multiple GMC investigations disclosed over a decade, that previous substantive tribunal facts must remain undisturbed – as the GMC had previously reopened and changed facts, this application in the fourth tribunal hearing new matters, un-did select-actions of previous non-substantive tribunals so these recent changes would have to be ignored. This was openly explained with evidence and despite being granted which meant the GMC could not use this hearing as an opportunity for double-jeopardy, the tribunal allowed GMC shenanigans then applied the application after Stage 2 when confronted.

Stage 1 the GMC tribunal despite being experienced and versed in the Gentings test for dishonesty that Judge Eyre had directed them to consider whilst appearing not to be aware the previous tribunal wrongly applied  v Ghosh (1982) test. This tribunal refused to write in determinations, any defence submissions of the state of mind as submitted with multiple objective evidence. Also submitted were several White comparators with a similar case of another doctor, with the GMC complainant of GMC tribunal member Dr Sarah Marwick and repeated clear examples of dishonesty within related proceedings by the White GMC High Court Barrister Mr Peter Mant and Mr Ian Brooks. The tribunal refusing to apply the application already granted, refused to accept defence submissions ‘of pending future multiple FtP investigations as a repercussion of whistleblowing against the GMC and providing significant details in writing’ and now despite new evidence with the GMC main witness of NHS Nottingham Miss Natalie Burbidge (national BMA example of a bad NHS manager and need for their regulation) admitting she had both the skills and all necessary disclosures were made in writing before 8^th June 2020 during the COVID pandemic where the GMC lied and said they will also not be racist and blunt with complaints against any doctor volunteering, the tribunal made a decision contrary to evidence that despite stating Yes to Fitness to practice problems, the badly worded single sentence inconsistent with comments or 100-page addition was dishonest with intent of hiding any GMC FtP investigations, partly by the GMC stating the investigation started earlier and previous GMC tribunals did not follow clear rules (which should have been ignored given granted application).

Stage 2 – considered new case and review case of the 12mph driving conviction with extensive submissions with 5-years’ worth of appraisals, hundreds of hours of CPDs, discussion with GMC, lots of learning and breaking down insight into 9 components and following all recommendations of Judge Mithani and Judge Eyre. However the GMC state it is not the balance of probability or criminal burden they used but it has to absolute and 0% risk otherwise I am not fit to practice. The Tribunal conflated this further with my current non-medical protest/BMA actions against the GMC means I am medical unfit to practice and all defence submissions are acknowledged but weighted close to zero in a GMC AI-conflated written submission.

Annex C application – Given GMC stage 2 submissions about race and whistleblowing against the GMC I made a full independent application that the GMC should uphold the law and their own guidance and see it as positive, or in the alternative they should be neutral and discard GMC submissions. The tribunal made a decision that race and whistleblowing were aggravating factors but refused to provide a determination Annex C. Further of the tribunal own application, they refused to provide determinations on resolution of my previous 2 granted applications that I evidenced was not applied. The GMC tribunal lied with the GMC MPTS tribunal clerk and said this will be provided after the hearing but then refused to provide it given already-in-evidence GMC Media Policy fully aware the High Court would have no choice and it would damage the reputation of the Racist Medical Council. Judge Eyre appears simply did not read submissions.

Stage 3 – considered both the new and review case and said chances of reoccurrence was low despite the driving being irrelevant to medical regulation and everything requested was provided. Normally if punishment has been applied, this would be the end of the matter. However, the panel wrongly combined both cases for punitive sanctions and despite being still close to 0% they said as they cannot give other sanctions so they are left with erasure with lack of common sense.

5^th High Court Appeal – As expected failed but unusually Judge Eyre failed on 6 grounds, most of which were not actually considered/written and Judge Eyre made new/wrong assertions contrary to submissions, like the opposite of clearly stating YES to fitness to practice problems. The judge again appears actively in associated communications to ignore the pivotal named Brief Disclosure statement and now, the new admission that all necessary information was provided and in writing despite not being requested in the failed enquiry with over 100-pages of supplemental information is irrelevant to dishonesty. I was litigant in-person and understanding biases this was mainly a written submission, despite the issues of Mr Mant persistent dishonesty which he again made dishonest written submissions the Judge did not want to consider given relationship. Judge Eyre ignored the main issues and looked for minutiae and confusion. It thus made it easier for grounds to the Court of appeal; however Judge Eyre deferred the permission to appeal.

Court of Appeal with permission to appeal is currently applied on three grounds as par short summary above.

Parallel to the above Employment tribunal proceedings are taking place based on Michalek case that the GMC as a bad regulator can be taken to an Employment tribunal which the GMC continue to argue against and the Dr Karim case that the GMC triage staff as we all know, like other collected staff in the GMC, are racist. The Equal Justice solicitors I have had a paid meeting last year and was awaiting written outcome. We now have an ET3 and I am awaiting further direction and Employment Tribunal hearing.