The GMC’s Fitness to Practise Panel had found that Dr Odes’ fi tness to practise was impaired by misconduct, and suspended his registration for four months. Dr Odes appealed against the Panel’s fi ndings in relation to the facts, impairment and sanction. The Court found in favour of the GMC and Dr Odes was ordered to pay the GMC’s costs.  

The Court found that the Panel was the correct body to have made decisions on the facts of the case and that the correct standard of proof was the balance of probabilities. Dr Odes challenged the suffi ciency of the statement of reasons that had been provided by the Panel and the Court found that this did not need to be a judgment of the type that might be expected in a court of law. The parties must simply be able to understand why one party had won and the other lost.  

The full judgment can be read here:  

Odes v General Medical Council [2010] EWHC 552 (Admin)