Mr O Iwuchukwu v General Medical Council and 2 others — 2020

This was a preliminary hearing judgment on the respondents' application to strike out all or part of Mr Iwuchukwu's claims. The claimant, a black British consultant surgeon, brought complaints against the General Medical Council, Anna Rowland and Paul Bridge alleging direct race discrimination, indirect race discrimination, race-related harassment and victimisation arising from the GMC's investigation of his fitness to practise, restrictions on his practice, undertakings, and refusals to investigate complaints he had made about Mr Ian Martin. Employment Judge McDonald sat alone.

The tribunal struck out the allegation that the GMC forced the claimant to sign undertakings in November 2016 and July 2017, finding that the contemporaneous documents described an invitation to agree undertakings, advised the claimant to consult legal advisers, and did not support the factual basis of compulsion. It also struck out the allegation that the GMC put undue pressure on Lewisham and Greenwich NHS Trust on 17 September 2019, finding that the GMC's email simply reflected and explained the undertakings by which the claimant had agreed to be bound.

The tribunal struck out the complaints based on alleged threats of sanctions for breach of undertakings on 11 January 2018, 17 September 2019 and 24 January 2020, finding that the GMC was warning the claimant of potential consequences of possible breaches and giving him an opportunity to make representations. It also struck out the complaint about cancellation of an assurance or performance assessment because of COVID-19, finding there were no reasonable prospects of showing that failure to carry out that assessment by telephone or Skype was less or unfavourable treatment, and noting that the GMC had later provided information about acceptable alternatives to an objective assessment.

All indirect race discrimination complaints were struck out. The tribunal found that the provision, criterion or practice formulations relied on were framed around the claimant himself being treated less favourably and were not PCPs applied, or which would be applied, to persons who did not share his characteristic of being a black British doctor. The judge recorded that those complaints were in substance direct race discrimination allegations.

The tribunal did not strike out a number of other direct race discrimination, harassment and victimisation allegations, including complaints about failure to investigate allegations against Mr Martin, alleged reliance on false or misleading material, delays in the investigation, refusal to lift restrictions, requiring an assurance assessment, and some complaints against the second and third respondents. The judge found that those allegations could not be said to have no reasonable prospects of success because the final hearing would hear evidence about GMC processes, context, timing, and the claimant's subjective evidence where relevant. However, the judgment records that the allegations not struck out had little reasonable prospects of success and were made subject to a deposit order. No compensation or other monetary remedy was awarded in this judgment.