Home / Cases / Lovett v HCPC

Lovett v HCPC


[2018] EWHC 1024 Admin

Marcus Grant, instructed by Christopher Dickinson of Dickinson Solicitors Limited, appeared for the Appellant psychologist in appealing a decision of a Panel representing his regulatory body, the HCPC, in erasing him from the register.

The central point of the statutory appeal was whether the regulatory body had sufficiently pleaded the allegation of dishonesty that was ultimately found against the Appellant, whether the allegation had been properly put to him during the commuted time that he gave evidence, and whether it was open to the Panel to make the finding against him in circumstances where he became unable to complete his oral evidence or participate fully in his defence of the allegations by reason of his failing health.

The Court (Ouseley J) dismissed the appeal finding that whilst the allegation of dishonesty could and should have been pleaded, and put to the appellant more clearly, standing back and considering the quality of representation that the appellant had before the Panel below, he had sufficient opportunity to understand and respond to the dishonesty allegations that ultimately were found against him and, on balance, there were insufficient grounds for the appeal court to interfere with the Panel’s exercise of discretion.

Related Barristers

Personal Injury
Clinical Negligence

Marcus Grant

Call 1993

Read more



Portfolio Builder

Select the practice areas that you would like to download or add to the portfolio

Download    Add to portfolio   
Title Type CV Email

Remove All


Click here to share this shortlist.
(It will expire after 30 days.)