1. Home
  2. Hearings and decisions
  3. Medical practitioners tribunals
  4. Dr Abdulkhaled Elmrghni AHMED Oct 19 hearing

Dr Abdulkhaled Elmrghni AHMED

Medical practitioners tribunal – New Hearing scheduled
Outcome on impairment
Hearing not yet held
Summary of outcome
Hearing not yet held
Type of case
Hearing date from
21 Oct 2020
Hearing date to
22 Oct 2020
Previously sat: 24 October - 7 November 2019, 11-13 March and 15 June 2020.
Location of hearing
This is a virtual hearing. It is possible to observe proceedings from our Manchester hearing centre. Please give us with 14 days notice if you would like to attend, so arrangements can be made. Contact us about attending this hearing
GMC reference number
Area of practice

Pre hearing information


The tribunal will reconvene to continue to consider the part-heard case of Dr Ahmed, whose fitness to practise was found impaired by reason of misconduct on 15 June 2020, and whose registration is subject to suspension until 15 December 2020. The tribunal will consider whether it is necessary to impose a further sanction on Dr Ahmed’s registration.

The Tribunal previously determined that Dr Ahmed’s pursuit of a personal relationship with a patient was sexually motivated behaviour. The Tribunal also found that Dr Ahmed had failed to keep an adequate patient record.


This reflects the allegation as it stands at the start of the hearing. The allegation may be amended as the hearing proceeds and when findings of fact are made by the tribunal.


All decisions are published online within 28 days of the conclusion of the hearing.


If you're a journalist and need up to date information about the allegation throughout the course of the hearing, please contact our press office at pressoffice@mpts-uk.org or call 0161 250 6868.

Private hearings

In accordance with Rule 41(2) of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules 2004, the tribunal may decide to exclude the public from the proceedings or any part of the proceedings, where they consider that the circumstances of the case outweigh the public interest in holding the hearing in public.