GMC Duty of Care Ruling | The Daily Round
The UK’s fastest-growing news and insight platform for the care sector.

Looking for something specific? Try a search…

UK News

Latest Health & Social Care News

Stay up to date with the latest health and social care news from across the UK. From breaking stories and sector developments to the people, organisations and issues making the news.

Court of Appeal rules GMC does not owe doctors a duty of care during fitness to practise investigations

Image for illustrative purposes only and may not depict the people, service or location featured in this article.

The Court of Appeal has ruled that the General Medical Council (GMC) does not owe doctors a legal duty of care when carrying out investigations into their fitness to practise.

The judgment confirms that the medical regulator cannot be sued in negligence for the way it conducts fitness to practise investigations, reinforcing previous legal decisions on the scope of the GMC’s statutory responsibilities.

The case was brought by a doctor who argued that the GMC owed him a duty of care during its investigation and that alleged failings in the process had caused him harm. However, the Court of Appeal concluded that imposing such a duty would be inconsistent with the regulator’s primary role of protecting patients and maintaining public confidence in the medical profession.

The court found that the GMC’s statutory functions are exercised in the public interest and that recognising a duty of care to individual doctors could create conflicts with its regulatory responsibilities. The judges also noted that doctors already have access to established legal safeguards, including the ability to challenge GMC decisions through statutory appeal routes and judicial review where appropriate.

The ruling provides greater legal certainty for the GMC as it continues to investigate concerns about doctors’ fitness to practise. While the judgment limits negligence claims against the regulator, it does not remove the GMC’s obligation to conduct investigations fairly, lawfully and in accordance with its statutory procedures.

The decision is expected to have wider implications for professional regulators, reinforcing the principle that bodies exercising statutory regulatory functions in the public interest do not generally owe a private law duty of care to the individuals they investigate.

Stay informed with the stories shaping health and social care.

Register with The Daily Round for the latest sector news, inspections & reports, wellbeing content, workforce insights, expert features and practical updates—delivered free to your inbox.

Posted by:
M Ramalani
Editorial Assistant – The Daily Round

Everything You Need. In Bite-Sized Updates

Busy day? We’ve got you covered. Get FREE daily news, practical insights, opportunities and wellbeing content, carefully curated for busy health and social care professionals. Just enter your details below to get The Daily Briefing delivered straight to your inbox.

Your Information
Your Interests
By subscribing, you agree to receive emails from The Daily Round, including news, updates and other relevant communications. Your information will be processed in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Sign up to our daily briefing

You can unsubscribe at any time. Please refer to our Policies for more information.

Everything You Need. In Bite-Sized Updates

Busy day? We’ve got you covered. Get FREE daily news, practical insights, opportunities and wellbeing content, carefully curated for busy health and social care professionals. Just enter your details below to get The Daily Briefing delivered straight to your inbox.

Your Information
Your Interests
By subscribing, you agree to receive emails from The Daily Round, including news, updates and other relevant communications. Your information will be processed in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. You can unsubscribe at any time.