Dishonesty and misleading allegations against a dental practitioner are dismissed

News

19/01/2016

In a disciplinary hearing before the General Dental Council (GDC) Professional Conduct Committee, Simon Butler represented Dr. B, a private general dental practitioner in Worthing.

The GDC made a number of serious allegations against Dr. B alleging dishonesty, behaving in a misleading manner, failing to obtain consent, and failing to provide competent treatment to three patients.

The allegations concerning dishonesty and misleading statements were dismissed and/or withdrawn following submissions. 

In the recent case of Dr. Qureshi v General Medical Council [2015] EWHC 3729 (Admin), King J said:

“Their reasoning on dishonesty is flawed not because on the face of it it does not read well, but because it fails to take into account that dishonesty is a finding against a professional which is probably the most serious finding which a Panel can make, and requires very careful consideration of all factors before it is reached.”

Misconduct allegations concerning dishonesty and misleading statements are very serious matters for professional practitioners.  As King J said in Dr. Qureshi, it is probably the most serious finding which a Panel can make.  It requires very careful consideration.

Findings of dishonesty impact on a professional’s integrity, particularly when associated with professional practice.  It is highly damaging to the dental professional’s fitness to practise and a panel is entitled to take into account the way in which a registrant has conducted his or her defence and any dishonesty therein. 

Allegations alleging dishonesty and misleading conduct are becoming a common feature in disciplinary proceedings and require expertise from an experienced practitioner.

Simon Butler was instructed by BSG Solicitors LLP on behalf of the dentist.

Featured Counsel

Simon Butler

Call 1996

Latest News & Events

Case summary: John v Jane [2026] EWHC 415 (Fam)

Much of children law involves the exploration of the facts relating to the child’s care and welfare, often coloured by the complex relationship dynamics between the adult protagonists. Occasionally, however, the facts which need to be established can be more fundamental.  In John v Jane…

Special Guardianship at the End of Care Proceedings: Threshold Still Matters

By Laura Hibberd Re E (A Child) (Special Guardianship Order: Public Law Proceedings) [2026] EWCA Civ 1167 Special guardianship orders are often thought of as the “middle ground” of permanence: more secure than a care order, less final than adoption, and with the child’s legal…

Case Summary: Re C (Child Arrangements Orders; Domestic Abuse; Child Focused Court) [2026] EWCA Civ 1216

By Tim Parker KC The President of the Family Division handed down judgment on 29th September 2026 the decision in the first appeal following the introduction of Child-Focused Courts pilot. In Re C (Child Arrangements Orders; Domestic Abuse; Child Focused Court) [2026] EWCA Civ 1216…

© Deka Chambers 2026

Search

Portfolio Builder

Select the expertise that you would like to download or add to the portfolio

Download    Add to portfolio   
Portfolio
Title Type CV Email

Remove All

Download


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