Corporal punishment, religious beliefs, professional misconduct and the ECHR: ABC v General Medical Council

Warning: the facts of this case are extremely distasteful.

Background

In ABC v General Medical Council [2025] EWHC 242 (Admin), the appellant, a doctor, appealed under s.40 Medical Act 1983 against a determination of the Medical Practitioners’ Tribunal, which had found proved that between 2012 and January 2019, he had physically abused his children using corporal punishment and had decided to strike him off the register. He was suspended pending the outcome of the appeal [1].

Appearing in person, ABC argued that the Tribunal’s finding of fact that his conduct had represented a serious falling short of the standard expected of a doctor [9] and its decision that his fitness to practise had been impaired [9] had been perverse, and it had imposed a manifestly excessive sanction. He also pleaded interference with his rights under the ECHR. The GMC argued that the Court should uphold its determination and denied any interference with ABC’s Convention rights [2]. Continue reading