Dr Jeremy MCKENZIE

Medical practitioners tribunal – New Hearing scheduled
Outcome on impairment
Hearing not yet held
Summary of outcome
Hearing not yet held
Type of case
Misconduct, Conviction / Caution
Hearing date from
19 Jan 2021
Hearing date to
22 Jan 2021
Details
Previously sat: 4-13 January 2021. Non-sitting day: 8 January 2021.
Location of hearing
This is a virtual hearing. It is possible to observe proceedings from our Manchester hearing centre. Please give us 14 days' notice if you would like to attend, so arrangements can be made. Contact us about observing this hearing
GMC reference number
4518499
Area of incident
Folkestone and Hythe

Pre hearing information

Allegation

The tribunal will reconvene to continue its inquiry into the allegation that, on 1 November 2017 at Folkestone Magistrates’ Court, Dr McKenzie was convicted of driving after consuming more than the prescribed limit of alcohol and was subsequently sentenced to 120 hours of community service and disqualified from driving for 24 months. The tribunal will also inquire into the allegation that Dr McKenzie failed to notify the GMC of this charge or conviction without delay.

The tribunal will also consider the allegation that on one or more occasions, between 2015 and 2018, Dr McKenzie mentally abused ‘Dr A’.

 

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.