Thread by @tribunaltweets2

Good morning & welcome to the medical practitioners tribunal, today dealing with the request to adjourn the hearing to consider the fitness to practice of Dr Michael Webberley, co-founder of Gender GP.

We're due to start at 11am.

Catch up here:

https://twitter.com/tribunaltweets2/status/1505117328274595842?t=LHw5V3ldqTz4fyLWMJlOBQ&s=19

The panel is currently private. I'll be called when they're ready.

For now, we know GMC counsel are Simon Jackson QC (SJ) and his junior Ryan Donohue (RD).

Note: RD was counsel for GMC in Dr Harrop case

We don't know if MW has counsel today or if he'll represent himself yet

Further abbrevs:

GMC: General Medical Council
MPTS: Medical Practioner Tribunal Service
MW: Michael Webberley
VE: Voluntary Erasure
GGP: Gender GP

I have just been told that the 'in camera' (private) meeting is still continuing and it may be some time until I am called.

While we wait, FYI, I've driven 180miles today as GMC & MPTS have refused our remote access request.
@tribunaltweets are a self funding team of citizen journalists, dedicated to bringing #OpenJustice. It's frustrating other reporters can observe online. We continue to request.

@tribunaltweets I have now been moved to a smaller waiting room, hopefully it'll not be long now until we start.

@tribunaltweets The Chair is discussing the adjournment request and has determined the case should NOTBbe adjourned and will proceed. Written reasons will be proved for the decision and available to the public.

@tribunaltweets MW's counsel is RBS
RBS: bearing in mind the length of time, the tribunal commit its decision to writing so it can be considered in high court. It would be surprising if a decision to adjourn is made without a written determination.

@tribunaltweets RBS: Partic. In absence of MW.and why the case wasn't adjourned
Chair: we acknowledge it'd be better for written determination however we can't ignore that 8 working says have been occupied and didn't start til 12 today. We hoped to start at 11.

Chair: the amount if time alloted to the case is because its necessary, the only reason we haven't given written detail yet is we understand on current availability of experts, unless they start giving evidence this week.

Chair: we will give a determination by Wednesday, if we were to proceed in MW absence we could anticipate having the experts reschedule and conclude in sufficient time. We can then be confident we can complete the full proceedings.

SJ: thank you chair. In terms of the decision of putting determination in writing, now the issue has been raised subject to this observation. RBS has not said the decision has been made to seek leave to pursue the matter, in terms of appealing the adjournment denial.

SJ: High Court will need to see written reasons and tribunal needs to do that. In terms of timetabling, the enquires GMC have made, the plan would have been, the first expert guve evidence tomorrow. The opening can only be completed once proof of service and proceeding in absence

SJ: the second expert, Psychologist is available and another expert is only next available late march. If one looks at prospect the tribunal does written determination by tomorrow the case can be opened and start with Dr Kieran on Friday

SJ: GMC has already done a lot of work already to reach stage 1 determination. There will be a lot of time spent looking at all of the charges.

SJ: if we have a table schedule with all evidence, a working document, not an advanced document due to where we are at. That can still be distilling and finalised and that will save tribunal time. Primary objective to complete hearing, second to get to end of stage 1.

SJ: our subs are early determination, proceed in absence, then call Dr Keiran and Dr Quinton next week and make speedy process thereafter.
Chair: evidence matrix will make us be able to identify specific issues and subject to decisions and be very useful

Chair: are you confident both experts can conclude evidence within a day, on assumption MW will NOT be participating.
SJ: gMC are optimistic. Position is the tribunal has read the bundles. Including 600 pages of expert evidence and further Patient records

SJ: you'll have all info distilled and they're cross referenced. I'm in a position wherevI'm focussing on what additional questions to experts in chief. The Tribunal must think about how much time you need. Little to be gained by counsel asking Qs when they've got all info.

Chair asks colleagues if they'd like to ask anything.

Chair: The tribunal will consider submissions and applications made by MW, I suggest we resume in public at 2.15pm. We desire to conduct the proceedings in public so far as we are able to.

@threadreaderapp please unroll