Media summary of Judgment – General Medical Council -v- Professor Sir Roy Meadow

1. The Court of Appeal has today handed down its judgment in the appeal by the GMC from a judgment of Mr Justice Collins given on 17 February 2006 in which he allowed an appeal by Professor Meadow against a finding by the GMC that he was guilty of serious professional misconduct and ordered that his name be erased from the register. The alleged misconduct arose in connection with evidence he gave for the prosecution in 1999 in the trial of Mrs Sally Clark for the alleged murder of her two sons. Mrs Clark was initially convicted but, although her first appeal against conviction failed, a second appeal succeeded and her convictions were quashed.
2. The appeal to the Court of Appeal raised two questions. The first was whether the GMC had jurisdiction to consider the case against Professor Meadow. Mr Justice Collins had held that it did not on the ground that, as an expert witness, Professor Meadow was immune from disciplinary proceedings arising in connection with his expert evidence. The Attorney General intervened in the appeal to argue that no such immunity existed. The Court of Appeal accepted the submissions made by the Attorney General and the GMC. It held that an expert witness is not immune from disciplinary proceedings of the kind which took place in this case. It accordingly held that the GMC had jurisdiction to consider Professor Meadow’s case.
3. The second question raised in the appeal was whether the judge was wrong to hold that the GMC was wrong to hold that Professor Meadow was guilty of serious professional misconduct. By a majority, which comprised Lord Justice Auld and Lord Justice Thorpe, with the Master of the Rolls, Sir Anthony Clarke, dissenting, the Court of Appeal held that Professor Meadow was not guilty of serious professional misconduct and that the GMC was wrong to hold that he was. It accordingly held that Mr Justice Collins was right to allow Professor Meadow’s appeal and dismissed the GMC’s appeal.

Ends