Application of Part 7
This Part shall apply to proceedings before the Professional Conduct Committee at which they are to consider a matter referred to them by the registrar under section 24(2) or 36I(2) of the Act (erasure on grounds of fraud).
Consideration at a hearing
Where the registrar has referred a matter to the Professional Conduct Committee under section 24(2) or 36I(2) of the Act, the Professional Conduct Committee shall hold a hearing to consider the matter.
Application of Part 3 to proceedings to which this Part applies
Rules 13, 14 and 17 to 24 shall apply to proceedings to which this Part applies with the following modifications— (a) references to a Practice Committee shall be read as references to the Professional Conduct Committee; (b) in rule 13— (i) for paragraph (1)(e) substitute— (e) contain a charge setting out the grounds on which the registrar believes that a specified entry in the relevant register relating to the respondent has been fraudulently procured, and particularising the facts alleged against the respondent; (ii) for paragraph (3) substitute— (3) The registrar may, if he considers that it is appropriate to do so, send the same notification to more than one respondent, in which case rule 49 shall apply. (c) in rule 19(13), for “the respondent’s fitness to practise as a dentist or as a member of a profession complementary to dentistry is not impaired” substitute “the entry in the relevant register relating to the respondent has not been fraudulently procured”; (d) in rule 20— (i) for paragraphs (1)(b) and (3)(b) substitute— (b) make submissions on the question of whether, in the light of the facts found, the entry in the relevant register relating to the respondent has been fraudulently procured; and (ii) for paragraph (1)(c) substitute— (c) where the submission is that the entry in the relevant register relating to the respondent has been fraudulently procured, make submissions as to whether the respondent’s name ought to be erased from the relevant register. (iii) for paragraph (3)(c) substitute— (c) where the presenter has submitted that the entry in the relevant register relating to the respondent has been fraudulently procured, make submissions as to whether, if the Professional Conduct Committee accept that submission, the respondent’s name ought to be erased from the relevant register. (e) in rule 21— (i) for paragraph (1)(a) and (b) substitute— (a) whether the entry in the relevant register relating to the respondent has been fraudulently procured; and (b) if the Professional Conduct Committee determine that the entry in the relevant register relating to the respondent has been fraudulently procured, whether to give any direction under section 24(3) or 36I(3) of the Act. (ii) omit paragraph (3); (f) in rule 23— (i) for “rule 16(c), 21(1) or 22(2)” substitute “rule 21(1) or 22(2)”, (ii) omit paragraph (a), and (iii) in paragraph (b), omit “other”; and (g) in rule 24(1)(c), for “rule 16(c), 21(1) or 22(2)” substitute “rule 21(1) or 22(2)”.
Joinder
Unless they are of the view that there is a risk of prejudice to the fairness of the proceedings, and upon taking the advice of the legal adviser, the Professional Conduct Committee may consider at the same hearing the question of whether the entries in the relevant register relating to two or more respondents have been fraudulently procured where— (a) the grounds on which the registrar believes that the entry in the relevant register relating to each respondent has been fraudulently procured arise out of the same circumstances; or (b) in the view of the Professional Conduct Committee, it would be just to do so.
Provisions on this page are reproduced verbatim from official open data. See the attribution line.
Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0 (legislation.gov.uk).