Nursing and Midwifery Council, R (on the application of) v Adina

1. MR JUSTICE LINDBLOM: This is an application by the Nursing and Midwifery Council pursuant to Article 31 of the Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001 for an extension of six months to the interim Suspension Order originally made in the respondent's case on 21 January 2009 and subsequently extended for six months by the order of Charles J on 19 July 2010. The Order was made because it was considered to be necessary for public protection and otherwise in the public interest. Unless extended the order would expire today.

2. The application is supported by the witness statement of Mark Mallinson, a case manager in the Fitness to Practice Directorate of the Council, who has conduct of the respondent's case.

3. The respondent has not appeared and has not been represented at today's hearing. However, I am told, and I accept, that due service of the application on the respondent has been effected.

4. The respondent was employed as a staff nurse in the Accident and Emergency Department of the Queens Hospital by the Barking, Havering and Redbridge NHS Trust. He faces serious allegations of misconduct, which include the allegation that he sexually assaulted a female patient in his care and an allegation of attempted theft of a patient's property.

5. When he granted an extension of six months with a Suspension Order in July 2010, Charles J observed that, in his view, the respondent's case ought to have been brought to a conclusion without further extensions to the Order being sought. In the event, the case has still not been concluded some two years after the Interim Orders Panel of the Council's Investigating Committee first considered it in January 2009. However, I am told now that the case has been listed for a substantive hearing on 4, 5 and 6 May 2011. Mr Mallinson states in his witness statement that the fixing of the hearing has been complicated by the fact that eight witnesses are to be called.

6. In these circumstances, conscious as I am of the principles germane to the granting of such an extension identified by the Court of Appeal in General Medical Council v Dr Stephen Chee Cheung Hiew [2007] EWCA Civ 369 , and having regard also the obvious gravity of the allegations the respondent is facing, I am prepared to grant this application. I have to say, however, that I share the concern expressed by Charles J on the last occasion. As has been acknowledged on behalf of the Council, there has been delay. No doubt the progress of the case has not been helped by the fact that the respondent has apparently not cooperated in the investigation and he has now, it seems, been deported from the United Kingdom. But, at any rate, an outcome for the whole process is now in prospect and, in my judgment, the justification for maintaining the suspension until then remains good. The Interim Suspension Order will therefore be extended until 19 July 2011.

7. Thank you.

8. MR HAFEJEE: My Lord, I can hand up a draft order.

9. MR JUSTICE LINDBLOM: Yes. Yes, it says the Interim Order to be extended for a further six months. That is the normal form of such an order rather than to a specific date, is that right?

10. MR HAFEJEE: Indeed, my Lord.

11. MR JUSTICE LINDBLOM: And no order for costs. Very well. I approve that draft order.

12. Thank you very much Mr Hafejee.

13. MR HAFEJEE: Thank you, my Lord.