Dr Joshua PEAKE

Medical practitioners tribunal – New Hearing scheduled
Outcome on impairment
Hearing not yet held
Summary of outcome
Hearing not yet held
Type of case
Conviction / Caution
Hearing date from
11 Aug 2021
Hearing date to
13 Aug 2021
Location of hearing
St James’s Buildings, 79 Oxford Street, Manchester, M1 6FQ. 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 a hearing
GMC reference number
Area of incident

Pre hearing information


The tribunal will inquire into the allegation that on 19 August 2020, at Nottingham Crown Court, Dr Peake was convicted of: possession of indecent photographs/pseudo photographs of a child; attempting to engage in sexual communication with a child and cause a child of between 13 to 15 to look at an image of sexual activity.

It is alleged that on 9 September 2020, Dr Peake was sentenced to the following: a 3 year community order, including 80 hours unpaid work and a rehabilitation activity requirements for a maximum of 30 days; a Sexual Harm Prevention Order for a period of 5 years; his name being placed on the Barring List by the Disclosure and Barring Service; forfeiture and destruction of a laptop and Macbook and to pay a victim surcharge of £90.00.



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.