Mahfouz, R (on the application of) v General Medical Council, Court of Appeal - Administrative Court, June 27, 2003, [2003] EWHC 1695 (Admin)

Extract

---

Mahfouz, R (on the application of) v General Medical Council, Court of Appeal - Administrative Court, June 27, 2003, [2003] EWHC 1695 (Admin)

SMITH BERNAL WORDWAVE

CO/2762/2003

Neutral Citation Number: [2003] EWHC 1695 Admin

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION

THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

Royal Courts of Justice

Strand

London WC2

Friday, 27 June 2003

B E F O R E:

MR JUSTICE DAVIS

- - - - - - -

THE QUEEN ON THE APPLICATION OF MAHFOUZ

(CLAIMANT)

-v-

PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE OF THE GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL

(DEFENDANT)

and

THE GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL

(INTERESTED PARTY)

- - - - - - -

Computer-Aided Transcript of the Stenograph Notes of

Smith Bernal Wordwave Limited

190 Fleet Street London EC4A 2AG

Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7831 8838

(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)

- - - - - - -

MISS O'ROURKE (instructed by MAYER, BROWN, ROWE & MAW) appeared on behalf of the CLAIMANT

MR ENGLEHART QC and MR CLARKE appeared on behalf of the DEFENDANT

The INTERESTED PARTY did not attend and were not represented

- - - - - - -

J U D G M E N T

(As Approved by the Court)

- - - - - - -

Crown copyright©

1. MR JUSTICE DAVIS: The claimant, Dr Fayez Mahfouz, has for a number of years been practising under the style of Cosmetic Laser Surgeon in the West End of London. Dr Mahfouz holds the qualification, amongst others, of MBBS, although he is not a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons. The nature of his practice appears sufficiently from the title under which he works. During the course of 2002, certain complaints were made and charges raised by the General Medical Council against Dr Mahfouz. In their final form as amended, the charges read as follows:

"That being registered under the Medical Act,

1. On a number of occasions between 6 June 2000 and 17 October 2001, [Mr R] consulted you about the removal of his tattoo.

a. You failed to make an adequate assessment of his condition,

b. You made inappropriate and inaccurate claims about the likely efficacy of the treatment,

c. You failed to provide him with sufficient pre-operative information to enable him to give properly informed consent,

d. You provided inadequate and inappropriate treatment,

e. You failed to provide adequate and/or appropriate post-operative care,

f. You failed to keep adequate records;

2. On 5 January 2000, Miss A consulted you about the pigmentation marks on her legs ..."

And again, a number of particulars of the alleged failures to give appropr...

See the full content of this document

---