1. Home
  2. Parties and representatives
  3. Guidance for tribunals
  4. Tribunal guidance for doctors hearings
  5. Interim orders tribunal hearings
  6. Part B - reviewing interim orders
Interim orders tribunal hearings

Part B: reviewing interim orders

Introduction

  1. The purpose of this Part of Section two: IOT hearings is to support fair and consistent decision making by tribunals when they are reviewing if an interim order remains necessary and if so, what the proportionate response is. It applies to interim order tribunals (IOTs) and medical practitioners tribunals (MPTs) where the MPT is reviewing an existing interim order during a hearing that is being held to determine an allegation that a doctor’s fitness to practise is impaired.  

  2. Any interim order imposed by a tribunal must be reviewed within six months of the order being made, and thereafter every six months. However, following any review of an order, the doctor may request an early review. If three months have elapsed since the date of the immediately preceding review, then the order must be reviewed as soon as practicable after receipt of the doctor’s request.  

  3.  An interim order may be reviewed at any time when new evidence relevant to the order becomes available, which may affect the order in place.7  

  4.  If the GMC wishes to extend an order beyond the period initially set, then it must apply to the relevant Court8 to extend the order. Each extension will be for up to a maximum period of 12 months. There is no limit on the number of extensions which may be sought and granted. 

  5. There are three instances where a review must take place within three months of any preceding review of the order having taken place. This is where:
    1. an interim order of conditions has been replaced with an interim order of suspension
    2. an interim order of suspension has been replaced with an interim order of conditions, and
    3. the High Court has extended an order beyond the period initially set.
  6. On review, the tribunal has the power to maintain, vary, replace or revoke an interim order.

  7. Cases can be reviewed on the papers as an alternative to holding a hearing.9 This means the review will be conducted by a tribunal or tribunal chair without the attendance of the parties. 

  8. Reviews on the papers take place when the GMC and doctor (‘the parties’) agree on the proposed outcome. The tribunal or tribunal chair has the power to maintain, vary, replace or revoke an interim order in line with the terms of an order that has been agreed and submitted to the MPTS by the parties. Alternatively, they can decide that a hearing should take place to consider the case.

  9. Supplementary operational guidance for tribunals or tribunal chairs reviewing cases on the papers is available in IOT reviews on the papers.

  10. The process for reviewing an interim order that a tribunal should follow is illustrated in the diagram below.

  11. Whilst the diagram represents each key consideration for the tribunal as a step, in practice when the interim order is being reviewed at a hearing, the parties will submit evidence and make one set of submissions on whether an interim order remains necessary and if so, the type. Having then considered all relevant matters, the tribunal will provide one written decision. 

Process for decision making for reviewing an interim order

A text alternative is available for this image, follow the link "Text alternative: process for decision making for reviewing an interim order"

Section 41(2) of the Medical Act 1983 (as amended).

The relevant Court means the Court of Session where a doctor’s registered address is in Scotland, the High Court in Northern Ireland where a doctor’s registered address is in Northern Ireland and the High Court of England and Wales for all others. Where reference is made to the High Court in this document it includes the Court of Session and the High Court in Northern Ireland.

Rule 26A of the FtP Rules 2004.