We were instructed by our client who had been found unfit to practice by his University following a Fitness to Practice Hearing. Our client had, prior to instructing us, been through the University’s appeal procedures and also the OIA, where his complaint had been rejected.
Having discussed this case with him at the initial consultation it was apparent to us there were a number of procedural errors in the way that the University’ Hearing had taken place (such as the fact that he was not offered legal representation when it was potentially allowed, that one allegation against him had been dismissed yet remained in the Bundle, there was apparent bias in relation to the Panel members, as well as there being a number of factual issues in relation to the case itself).
We argued that the University had erred significantly and the OIA had also not considered these issues.
The OIA initially sought further information due to the fact that it had already closed the complaint outcome and following further correspondence the OIA eventually agreed that the previous fitness to practice procedure was unfair. As such the University was advised to convene a new Fitness to Practice Panel Hearing. This was extremely positive outcome given the client had exhausted his primary remedies before he came to us and this now gives him a chance to challenge the allegations afresh.
