We use cookies to give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse our site, you accept our cookie policy.
Dr Omar MANSOUR
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
07 Oct 2019
Hearing date to
18 Oct 2019
History
Adjourned part-heard: previously sat 3- 17 Apr 2019.
Location of hearing
St James’s Buildings, 79 Oxford Street, Manchester, M1 6FQ (get directions)
Pre hearing information
Allegation
The tribunal will inquire into the allegation that Dr Mansour failed to discuss the risks of a haemorrhoidectomy and fistula surgery, with a number of patients who had consented to the surgery and failed to record having discussed the risks of the particular surgery with the patients.
It is also alleged that Dr Mansour failed to advise and/or arrange a gastroscopy for a number of patients when involved in their care and treatment.
It is further alleged that Dr Mansour failed to advise and/or arrange investigations for a number of patients when involved in the care and treatment of those patients.
The above 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.
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.