- Cited — Mohammed Adil v General Medical Council 2023-11-02
“… General Medical Council [2002] 1 WLR 1691 at [10], [21]; Meadows v General Medical Council [2007] QB 462 at [197]; Raschid & Fatnani v General Medical Council [2007] 1 WLR 1460 at [18]-[19]; and Bawa-Garba v General Medical Council [2019] 1 WLR 1929 at [67].…”
- Cited — Sastry & Anor v General Medical Council 2021-04-30
“…Raschid and Fatnani v General Medical Council [2007] 1 WLR 1460…”
- Applied — Sastry & Anor v General Medical Council 2021-04-30
“…d principles developed in relation to section 40 appeals (in cases including: Meadow v General Medical Council [2007] QB 462; Raschid v General Medical Council [2007] 1 WLR 1460; and Southall v General Medical Council [2010] 2 FLR 1550) as appropriately modified, can be applied to section 40A appeals.…”
- Cited — Sastry & Anor v General Medical Council 2021-04-30
“…JPL 677, para 30; Khan v General Pharmaceutical Council [2017] 1 WLR 169, para 36; Meadow’s case [2007] QB 462, para 197; and Raschid v General Medical Council [2007] 1 WLR 1460, paras 18–20. An appeal court should only interfere with such an evaluative decision if (1) there was an error of principle in carrying out the evaluation, or …”
- Cited — Sastry & Anor v General Medical Council 2021-04-30
“…orough Council [2016] EWCA Civ 42, [30]; Khan v General Pharmaceutical Council [2017] 1 WLR 169 at [36]; Meadow at [197]; and Raschid v General Medical Council [2007] 1 WLR 1460, [18]-[20]. It therefore said that an appeal court should only interfere with such an evaluative decision on sanction if (a) there was an error of principle in…”
- Cited — General Medical Council v Hayat 2018-12-13
“…30]; Khan v General Pharmaceutical Council [2016] UKSC 64, [2017] 1 WLR 169 at [36]; Meadow at [197]; and Raschid v General Medical Council [2007] EWCA Civ 46, [2007] 1 WLR 1460 at [18]-[20]. An appeal court should only interfere with such an evaluative decision if (1) there was an error of principle in carrying out the evaluation, or …”
- Applied — General Medical Council v Chandra 2018-08-13
“…ls (in cases including: Meadow v General Medical Council [2006] EWCA Civ 1390; [2007] QB 462; Fatnani and Raschid v General Medical Council [2007] EWCA Civ 46; [2007] 1 WLR 1460; and Southall v General Medical Council [2010] EWCA Civ 407; [2010] 2 FLR 1550) as appropriately modified, can be applied to section 40A appeals.…”
- Cited — Bawa-Garba v The General Medical Council & Ors 2018-08-13
“…ic interests are now contained in General Medical Council v Jagjivan [2017] EWHC 1247, [2017] 1 WLR 4438, Raschid v General Medical Council [2007] EWCA Civ 46, [2007] 1 WLR 1460, and Bolton v Law Society [1994] 1 WLR 512.…”
- Cited — Bawa-Garba v The General Medical Council & Ors 2018-08-13
“…30]; Khan v General Pharmaceutical Council [2016] UKSC 64, [2017] 1 WLR 169 at [36]; Meadow at [197]; and Raschid v General Medical Council [2007] EWCA Civ 46, [2007] 1 WLR 1460 at [18]-[20]. An appeal court should only interfere with such an evaluative decision if (1) there was an error of principle in carrying out the evaluation, or …”
- Cited — The General Optical Council v Clarke 2018-06-25
“…In Raschid v General Medical Council [2007] EWCA Civ 46, [2007] 1 WLR 1460, Laws LJ (with whom Chadwick LJ and Sir Peter Gibson agreed) noted (at paragraph 26) that the two principles which were especially important in the context of …”
- Cited — Hussain v General Pharmaceutical Council (Rev 1) 2018-01-18
“…In a similar vein, Laws LJ (with whom Chadwick LJ and Sir Peter Gibson agreed) said in Raschid v General Medical Council [2007] EWCA Civ 46, [2007] 1 WLR 1460 (at paragraph 26) that the two principles which were especially important in the context of disciplinary appeals were “the preservation of public confidence in…”
- Cited — Thilakawardhana, R (on the application of) v Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education & Anor 2018-01-17
“…In Raschid v General Medical Council [2007] EWCA Civ 46; [2007] 1 WLR 1460, Laws LJ (at [26]) spoke of the “two principles which are especially important in this jurisdiction: the preservation of public confidence in the profession an…”