Employment Tribunal can hear discrimination complaints by a doctor against the GMC

Book your free initial call

"*" indicates required fields

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Name*
Our 72 Hour Return Policy*
We endeavour to make an initial response to all enquiries within 24 hours but please be aware that on some occasions due to prior commitments or volume of calls we will not be able to respond in that time frame. We also operate a 72 hour return policy. This return policy means that if we have not responded with 72 hours of your initial enquiry we are unable to do so due to current workloads and we will destroy your data accordingly. This policy ensures you are not left waiting and have the certainty that your data is not compromised. In most instances however we are able to make contact within a 24 hour time frame. Please note our free initial advice service is available to clients at our total discretion and if your case is of a complex nature we may not be able to offer you a free consultation. However in these instances we will advise you what the charge would be for an initial fixed fee consultation.

In Michalak v General Medical Council the Supreme Court held that it is permissible for employment tribunals to hear discrimination claims against qualification bodies such as the GMC.

Dr Michalak had been employed by an NHS Trust but was found to have been unfairly dismissed. Before the unfair dismissal was determined she had been referred, by the Trust, to the General Medical Council (GMC) which began fitness to practice proceedings. Dr Michalak then complained, in a separate tribunal claim that the GMC had discriminated against her.

Section 120(7) of the Equality Act 2010 prevents employment tribunal claims agains qualification bodies when “by virtue of enactment” their decision is subject to “proceedings in the nature of an appeal”.

The Supreme Court found that the employment tribunal did have jurisdiction to hear the claim as, in the context of this case, judicial review was not “in the nature of an appeal”. Discrimination complaints cannot be answered by looking at the reasons why a discriminator acted in a discriminatory manner and then deciding whether that then lay within the range of reasonable responses. It also found that as judicial review was originally a common law procedure it was, therefore, not a solution provided “by virtue of enactment”.

Written by

Lorraine Emery
16th November 2017