1. Home
  2. Hearings and decisions
  3. Medical practitioners tribunals
  4. Dr Aliaksandr CHUPIN Nov 23

Dr Aliaksandr CHUPIN

Medical practitioners tribunal – New Hearing scheduled
Outcome on impairment
Hearing not yet held
Summary of outcome
Hearing not yet held
Type of case
Misconduct
Hearing date from
29 Jul 2024
Hearing date to
13 Aug 2024
Details
Hearing adjourned part-heard. Previously sat: 27 November - 01 December 2023.
Location of hearing
St James’s Buildings, 79 Oxford Street, Manchester, M1 6FQ Contact us about observing a hearing
6069247
Area of practice
Liverpool

Pre hearing information

Allegation

The tribunal will inquire into the allegation that on 28 October 2020 and 13 July 2021, Dr Chupin undertook a telephone conversation with Patient A and Patient B respectively and failed to provide appropriate care. It is alleged that Dr Chupin’s failings related variously to history taking, differential diagnosis, assessment, management, safety netting, record keeping, advice and prescribing.

It is further alleged that Dr Chupin made entries in both patient records which were untrue and, having learned of Patient B’s death on 13 July 2021, amended Patient B’s medical records without noting that the entries had been made retrospectively. It is alleged that Dr Chupin’s actions were dishonest.

 

Allegations

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.

Decisions

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

Journalists

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.