Martin Hadley

R v M Fraud. Client was a pharmacist accused of a fraud valued in excess of £80K. Unfortunately the Crown Prosecution Service failed to understand the technical processes of the client’s business and his ability to make a legitimate claim for costs. The client was acquitted after trial.

L. Gross Negligence Manslaughter. The clients were a pharmacist and his colleagues interviewed by the police, overseen by the Special Cases Unit of the Crown Prosecution Service, during a period of 5 days. Ultimately, no action was taken as we helped demonstrate that the pharmacy had robust systems in place and these systems were routinely used.

P. Inquest. Representing a pharmacist and her colleagues who were ‘interested parties’ at an inquest lasting 5 days. The Coroner in his conclusion highlighted shortcomings in the practices of others while making no criticism was made of our client’s practice.

R. Investigation. The client was a pharmacist being investigated by the General Pharmaceutical Council for failing to dispense medication requested on a prescription. Written representations were submitted denying wrong doing. Thereafter the Council closed its investigation into our client and took no action, instead giving advice to our client’s employer.

J . Fitness to Practice. Advocacy undertaken before the Fitness to Practice Committee of the General Pharmaceutical Council on behalf of a client accused of making various dispensing errors. It was alleged that due to the number and frequency of these errors he was not fit to practice. It was demonstrated, however, that the error rate was below the national average and the Committee found that the client was fit to practice and that his performance was ‘nearer to excellent than poor’. Unsurprisingly, no action was taken.

General Pharmaceutical Council v P. Successful representations made on behalf of a pharmacist technician who had failed to disclose a police caution.  Further information can be found here.