High Court challenge to legality of serious shortage protocols
For David Reissner, one organisation’s legal challenge to allowing pharmacists to dispense an alternative in the case of a major medicine shortage was a surprise.
It’s only a been a few weeks since the Human Medicines (Amendment) Regulations 2019 order came into force, which allows pharmacists to supply an alternative if there is a serious shortage of the medicine prescribed, in accordance with a ‘serious shortage protocol’.
News that the Good Law Project – a non-profit organisation that says it fights cases to defend or change the law in the areas of Brexit, tax and workers’ rights – has applied to the High Court for permission to challenge the regulations comes as a surprise.
I wouldn’t have expected the shortage protocol to be on the Good Law Project’s hit list. This is partly because ministers’ new powers can be used in the case of any serious shortage – not just in the event of a Brexit-related shortage – and partly because, when patients need medicines, everyone wants them to be available without delay.
The Good Law Project says – among other things – the shortage protocol regulations are unlawful because:
- they contradict section 64 of the Medicines Act, which prohibits a supply of a medicine which is not of the nature or quality demanded
- they are inconsistent with the prohibition on supplying a prescription-only medicine (POM), except in accordance with a prescription
- there should have been a proper consultation before implementing a “complex, sensitive and life-endangering proposal”.
As far as section 64 of the Medicines Act is concerned, it only takes effect if what is supplied harms a patient. As for the prohibition on supplying a POM without a prescription, there are already a number of exceptions to this requirement, including emergency supplies and patient group directions.
The government normally consults for at least 12 weeks before implementing changes in the law. The Good Law Project complains that the Department of Health and Social Care (DH) only conducted an informal consultation with selected pharmacy stakeholders over a few days.
The DH said the shortage protocol will not extend to epilepsy medicines. However, the Good Law Project complains that other groups, such as those concerned with Parkinson’s or multiple sclerosis, were also not consulted.
I am not convinced about the legal argument. The impending Brexit may cause or exacerbate shortages, and there wasn’t time for the proper consultation good government usually requires. The DH has made it clear a shortage protocol for any medicine will involve clinical input; it is hardly likely that the clinicians who advise the DH will suggest alternative medicines if it would destabilise a patient’s regime.
Judicial review is a two-stage process. A judge will now consider the Good Law Project’s documents and the DH’s written response, possibly without a hearing. If the judge considers the organisation has an arguable case, a full hearing will be ordered. If the Good Law Project is successful at the full hearing, amendments to the regulations will have to be withdrawn, and a full consultation may have to be carried out.
If a serious shortage occurs in the meanwhile, I expect the DH will have to use its powers if the alternative would be damaging to the health of patients. I’d like to know what the Good Law Project would expect the DH to do.
Property Patter: Navigating the complexities of Pharmacy Property
Pharmacy property is a specialist area which contains many traps for the unwary.
Amelia Goodwin and Georgina O'Sullivan write for Pharmacy Business on managing employee performance
Why contractors should prioritise performance management of employees as a regular feature of their business strategy.
Pharmacy Brief - March 2021
The March edition of our Pharmacy Brief
Natalie Deuchar and Leonora Owens write for Pharmacy Business on the considerations to take into account when pharmacists look to obtain a new unit
Pharmacists should be aware of the law when considering obtaining a new unit.
Noel Wardle quoted by Chemist and Druggist on the issues that need to be considered before pharmacies adopt a hub-and-spoke dispensing model
Under current legislation, the hub-and-spoke model can be carried out by pharmacies owned by the same legal entity.
Pharmacy Brief - December 2020
The December edition of our Pharmacy Brief
Noel Wardle writes for Chemist and Druggist on how pharmacists can supply the COVID-19 vaccine lawfully
Pei-Li Kew writes for P3 Pharmacy on the differences between share and asset transactions when buying a pharmacy
Noel Wardle writes for Pharmacy Business on whether a notice to close a pharmacy can be withdrawn
Noel Wardle writes for Chemist & Druggist on the downsides of the new MUR legislation
Pharmacy Brief - September 2020
The September edition of our Pharmacy Brief
Noel Wardle writes for P3 Pharmacy on the risks of using volunteers to deliver medicines
Pei Li Kew
Will local pharmacies experience the same Deliveroo-volution as the restaurant industry did five years ago? LloydsPharmacy leads the way.
Pharmacy Brief - June 2020
The June edition of our Pharmacy Brief
Rachel Warren writes for Chemist & Druggist on pharmacy contractors' duty to try to acquire PPE
Noel Wardle quoted in The Pharmacist on the risk involved in medicine delivery by volunteers
Noel Wardle quoted by Pharmacy Network News on the implications of Covid-19 on pharmacies
Pharmacy Brief - March 2020
Welcome to the March 2020 edition of the Pharmacy Brief.
Noel Wardle provides advice to pharmacists in Chemist&Druggist on how to manage unfair trading practices
Noel Wardle writes for Chemist and Druggist on the FSA's new approach to CBD products