[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions >> Nursing and Midwifery Council v Oyenuga [2012] EWHC 2444 (Admin) (15 August 2012) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2012/2444.html Cite as: [2012] EWHC 2444 (Admin)

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

		Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL
		15th August 2012

1. MRS JUSTICE DOBBS: The Nursing and Midwifery Council seeks an extension of the interim suspension order made on 23rd February 2011, under Article 31(8) of the Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001. The extension sought is one of 4 months.
2. The respondent came to the attention of the applicant on 9th September 2010, following referral by the Executive Director of Clinical Governments and Quality at the South East Essex Partnership University National Health Service Foundation Trust. This was in relation to a number of allegations.
3. The hearing of the case had already taken place. It was heard on 9th July 2012 and ran for 3 days. At the outset the respondent admitted three charges: failure to call a doctor to examine the patient; speaking on a mobile phone whilst handling medication and dispensing more than one patient's medication at the same time.
4. The Panel found all of the remaining charges proved but there was no further time available to deal with sanction. The charges related to a number of areas of practice almost covering the spectrum of nursing care practice. The Committee continued the interim suspension order. The reasons for this were the protection of the public and otherwise in the public interest. At the last review, in April 2012, the Panel heard that the respondent was working as a volunteer health assistant.
5. He has been served by recorded delivery with notice of this application on 6th August but has not responded to the application.
6. The reason for the application is apparent: it is in order for the case to be listed for the sanctions hearing part of the case to be conducted. This will take place in either September or November.
7. The Conduct and Competence Committee found that all charges were proved as already noted. These are serious charges. It is important that the public is protected until the Conduct and Competence Committee decide the proper sanction in this case.
8. Having read all the papers, I am satisfied it is appropriate to extend the order for a further 4 months.