A guide to GPhC investigations and fitness to practise proceedings
As a pharmacist, any complaint or concern which is raised by the General Pharmaceutical Council can be confusing and stressful, particularly because the outcome may have an impact on your ability to earn a living.
It is therefore crucial that you take specialist legal advice at an early stage in order to put you in the best possible position to respond to the allegation and to help you to navigate your way through the various stages of the disciplinary process.
Charles Russell Speechlys is the UK's only law firm specialising in providing a full range of legal services to the community pharmacy sector. We have been representing pharmacists in GPhC and Royal Pharmaceutical Society (RPSGB) cases for over 50 years.
We have a dedicated team of solicitors who specialise in advising and representing people who are subject to fitness to practise proceedings. Our particular expertise in this area means that we are not only able to assist in relation to proceedings brought by the GPhC, but we are also able to advise regarding associated issues which may also be ongoing at the same time, such as corresponding fitness to practise steps being taken by NHS England; helping to protect your business as well as you.
This guide is intended as an overview of the GPhC’s fitness to practise process, and we hope that it will be of use to any pharmacy professional who is concerned about fitness to practise proceedings, or who wants to know more about how the GPhC regulates. It deals with the most common questions that our clients ask us when they are facing an investigation. The figures in this guide are taken from the GPhC’s Annual Reports of 2014/2015 and 2016/2017.
News & Insights
Smoothing over a pharmacy sale
There are things pharmacy owners can do which can help the due diligence process to go smoothly and minimise delays.
Disposing of your pharmacy lease – options and tips
The most common ways for pharmacies to vacate and dispose of the pharmacy lease before the end of the lease term.
Unintended Consequences: JSC BTA Bank v Mukhtar Ablyazov, Madiyar Ablyazov  EWCA Civ 1176
The Court of Appeal judgment confirms the correct approach when assessing the 'prohibited purpose' element of section 423 claims.