The Duty of Candour and Disciplinary Proceedings

Summary

  • The Regulators’ response to the Francis Report and the adoption of “A professional duty of candour”
  • The development of guidance to healthcare professionals.
  • The impact of “the professional duty of candour” on disciplinary proceedings: some practical tips on:
    • Rule 7 responses.
    • Witness statements: Should they be provided and if so when?
    • Giving evidence at a disciplinary hearing.

Will the Duty of Candour lead to a change in culture or practice at inquests?

Introduction

Robert Francis QC (as he then was) opened chapter 22 of his February 2013 inquiry report in the following way:

“Openness, transparency and candour are necessary attributes of organisations providing healthcare services to the public. There is strong evidence based on the actions in particular of the Trust and the Care Quality Commission (CQC) that insufficient observance of these requirements has been prevalent…”

A European perspective on the Duty of Candour

1. Where an individual doctor has provided information pursuant to his employer/provider’s duty under the Regulated Activities Regulations 2014, would the subsequent deployment of that information in criminal proceedings offend any individual doctor’s claim to the right against self-incrimination and/or violate Article 6? This short paper seeks to set  out the European perspective.

Article 6 states:

In the determination of… any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair….hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal.