Regulation of Health and Social Care Professionals Consultation

not complied with continuing professional development requirements or failed to
pay the registration fee. In most cases the application for restoration is decided
by the Registrar, with a right of appeal to for example an appeals committee. 71
Most of the regulators require applications to be accompanied by supporting
documentary evidence such as a self-declaration on health and conduct matters,
evidence of continuing professional development and a letter of good standing. 72
Provisional view
5.99 We believe that the new legal framework should provide that applications for
restoration in cases where a registrant’s entry has been erased following fitness
to practise proceedings must be referred to a Fitness to Practise Panel or similar
committee. Our approach to such hearings including the procedures to be
adopted is set out in detail in Part 9. The right of appeal against restoration
decisions would continue to be to the High Court in England and Wales, the
Court of Session in Scotland, or the High Court in Northern Ireland. We also
welcome views on whether restoration hearings and appeals could be transferred
to the Unified Tribunal Service. This is discussed in more detail under question 9-
3.
5.100 We also welcome views on whether the legislation should establish a consistent
time period before which applications for restoration cannot be made, and if so
what the appropriate time period should be. This could be seen as an important
matter on which greater consistency and certainty would be beneficial for
professionals and members of the public. The statute could, for example, specify
that across all the regulators an application for restoration cannot be made before
the end of the period of five years, and in any period of twelve months in which
the application has already been made. This is the current time period used by
most regulators, and would have no significant resource implications overall since
it is a longer time period than that used by the other regulators. However, we
recognise this would limit rights to appeal for former registrants where the
deadline is much less than 5 years.
5.101 In other cases which are not related to fitness to practise proceedings, we think
that the regulators should be able to develop their own processes, taking into
account their own circumstances and resources. In effect, the statute would
require each Council to establish in rules a process for considering applications
for restoration. This could include for example a system whereby all applications
are referred to the Registrar or to a committee. The regulators would also have
broad powers to establish rules on matters such as supporting documentary
evidence, time limits and fees.
Provisional Proposal 5-21: The statute should provide that applications for
restoration in cases where a registrant’s entry has been erased following
fitness to practise proceedings must be referred to a Fitness to Practise Panel
or similar committee.
71 General Pharmaceutical Council (Registration) Rules 2010, SI 2010 No 1617, r 16.
72
See, for example, General Pharmaceutical Council (Registration) Rules 2010, SI 2010 No
1617, r 16(3)(a).
90