1. Home
  2. Hearings and decisions
  3. Medical practitioners tribunals
  4. Dr Mufti LATIF Aug 22

Dr Mufti LATIF

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
15 Aug 2022
Hearing date to
12 Sep 2022
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 a hearing
3373994
Area of practice
Redbridge

Pre hearing information

Allegation

The tribunal will inquire into the allegation that between March 2006 and 5 June 2018, and as the only doctor at the St James Slimming and Beauty Clinic, that Dr Latif: distributed controlled drugs for weight loss and failed to ensure that they were stored appropriately; practised in the area of weight management inappropriately, without relevant qualifications, continuing professional development or discussion with your Responsible Officer; and consulted with various patients, inappropriately prescribed controlled drugs, prescribed medications which were not clinically indicated and failed to undertake assessments, make adequate records and clinically monitor patients.

 

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.