Key points
Currently, the GDC holds most of the Interim Orders Committee hearings in public and then publishes the allegations and sanction in full on their hearings website.
The publication of allegations, as yet undetermined by a substantive process, is unfair and has the potential to damage the reputation and mental well-being of the registrants concerned.
The GDC should reconsider their publication policy from Interim Orders Committee hearings.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 24 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $10.79 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
UK Supreme Court. ZXC v Bloomberg [2022] AC1158. 2022.
UK Judiciary. Sir Cliff Richard v BBC and the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire police [2018] EWHC 1837. 2018.
UK Judiciary. Barry Lall: Prevention of future deaths report 2023. Available at https://www.judiciary.uk/prevention-of-future-death-reports/barry-lall-prevention-of-future-deaths-report/ (accessed March 2024).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
D’Cruz, L. Oversharing - why the GDC needs to revise how it publishes its judgements. Br Dent J 236, 617 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-024-7337-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-024-7337-4