Search the Registers

The Case Examiners considered allegations that the Registrant’s fitness to practise is impaired by reason of misconduct and conviction. On 7 May 2025 the Registrant reported to the General Dental Council (GDC) that he had been convicted of a driving offence in October 2024. The GDC subsequently obtained a Police National Computer (PNC) disclosure print document and a Certificate of Conviction document, which detail that the Registrant was convicted on 25 October 2024 of being in charge of a motor vehicle in excess of the prescribed limit of alcohol. Due to the apparent delay in reporting the matter to the GDC, the GDC’s Registrar raised allegations that the Registrant’s fitness to practise is impaired by reason of misconduct and conviction. The Case Examiners determined that there was a real prospect of most of the factual allegations being found proved, and a real prospect that the statutory grounds of misconduct and conviction would be established by a Practice Committee. The Case Examiners also considered that there is evidence to suggest that the Registrant has contravened the GDC Guidance, ‘Standards for the Dental Team’ (September 2013), namely, Standard 9.1 ‘you must ensure that your conduct, both at work and in your personal life, justifies patients’ trust in you and the public’s trust in the dental profession’ and Standard 9.3 ‘you must inform the GDC if you are subject to criminal proceedings or a regulatory finding is made against you anywhere in the world.’ The Case Examiners further determined that, due to the nature of the misconduct and conviction, and the low likelihood of repetition of the Registrant’s actions, there was no real prospect of the Registrant’s current fitness to practise being found to be impaired by a Practice Committee. The Case Examiners have reminded themselves that the Registrant has been dealt with by the criminal justice system, and that it is not the Case Examiners’ role, or the purpose of the fitness to practise process, to punish the Registrant for a second time. However, to close the case without action would fail to take into account the need to declare and uphold proper standards of conduct, and the need to maintain public confidence in the dental professions. The Case Examiners have also taken into account the GDC’s ‘Case Examiner Indicative Outcomes Guidance’ (February 2018) and consider that, in this case, a warning is necessary to declare and uphold proper standards of behaviour and conduct, as well as to mark the serious impact which illegal behaviour can have on public confidence in the dental professions. Furthermore, the Case Examiners consider that publication of the warning for a period of 12 months is appropriate and proportionate in the circumstances and will ensure that a message is sent to the Registrant and to the wider profession regarding the importance of maintaining appropriate standards of behaviour. The Registrant is reminded that this warning will form part of his fitness to practise history, even after it is no longer published, and that it may need to be disclosed as required. The Case Examiners formally warn the Registrant that: • The commission of a criminal offence can have an adverse effect on the wider public interest, and this conduct should not be repeated. Any further criminal convictions will be viewed seriously and will likely call into question his fitness to practise. • He should, as required by the General Dental Council (GDC) guidance ‘Standards for the Dental Team’ (September 2013), maintain appropriate standards of behaviour in his professional and personal lives. • He must inform the GDC immediately if he is subject to criminal proceedings which includes being charged with and convicted of a criminal offence.