Miss Susan LIM MEY LEE

Medical practitioners tribunal – New Hearing scheduled
Outcome on impairment
Hearing not yet held
Summary of outcome
Hearing not yet held
Type of case
Misconduct, Determination of another regulator
Hearing date from
15 Apr 2019
Hearing date to
18 Apr 2019
Area of practice outside UK: Singapore Hearing previously sat 25- 27 Jul 2018, 5- 6 Sep 2018.
Location of hearing
St James’s Buildings, 79 Oxford Street, Manchester, M1 6FQ (get directions)
GMC reference number

Pre hearing information


In the first listing of the hearing which took place 25 - 27 July 2018, Miss Lim Mey Lee admitted to, and the Tribunal found proved, facts including that in 2012 the Singapore Medical Council (the SMC) determined that she was guilty of 94 counts of professional misconduct by and was suspended from practice for a period of three years. Miss Lim Mey Lee further admitted that she failed to inform the GMC about the SMC’s determination.

The Tribunal will reconvene in camera on 5 September 2018 to continue its consideration of whether Miss Lim Mey Lee’s fitness to practise is impaired by reason of a determination by a regulatory body and/or misconduct. It expects to be in a position to hand down its determination on impairment in session on 6 September 2018. Further dates in April 2019 have been agreed as above to conclude the hearing as required.



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.