Pharmacist Issued Warning for Incorrect Fitness to Practise Declaration on NHS England Form

The registrant submitted a fitness information form to NHS England in April 2021. On the form, he answered “No” to the question:

“Are or have you been, to your knowledge, subject to any investigation into, or proceedings relating to, your fitness to practise by a licensing body?”

At the time, he was in fact subject to an ongoing GPhC investigation that had begun in May 2019.

The Committee found that the registrant:

• Did not act dishonestly, as the mistake was not intentional.
• Failed to exercise appropriate caution and professional diligence when completing a formal declaration.
• Made an assumption that the investigation had concluded, without verifying it.

Findings

The Committee accepted that:

• The registrant did not intend to deceive and did not knowingly lie.
• His conduct was a misjudgment, not an act of dishonesty.
• The error occurred in the context of a professional role with leadership responsibility—he was applying to register a new pharmacy company with NHS England.

However, the Committee determined that the conduct amounted to misconduct, stating:

“You breached a fundamental principle of professionalism, namely to take appropriate care when making formal declarations in regulatory paperwork.”

The panel acknowledged that the registrant had:

• Reflected on the incident
• Taken steps to improve future accuracy in regulatory paperwork
• Demonstrated an understanding of the seriousness of such declarations

GPhC Determination on Impairment

The Committee found that the registrant’s fitness to practise was not currently impaired, based on:

• His remorse and insight
• The isolated nature of the incident
• Implementation of improvements to prevent recurrence

However, it still issued a formal warning, noting the importance of professional standards in public declarations.

Sanction

The GPhC imposed a 12-month warning, which will be published on the public register.

The warning stated:

“This warning is necessary to mark your misconduct and to uphold and declare proper professional standards and thereby ensure public confidence in the profession.”

Key Learning Points for Pharmacy Professionals

1. Declarations on regulatory and NHS forms must be taken seriously – Even small errors can have professional consequences.
2. Assumptions are not sufficient – Pharmacy professionals should confirm the status of regulatory matters before making formal statements.
3. Misconduct does not require dishonesty – Carelessness in a position of responsibility can still lead to warnings.
4. Leadership roles come with heightened expectations – Directors and Superintendent Pharmacists are expected to uphold the highest standards.
5. A warning can be issued even without impairment – To mark the importance of professional obligations and protect public trust.

---

Conclusion

This case illustrates how even unintentional misstatements on official forms can amount to misconduct, especially when made by pharmacy professionals in leadership roles. The GPhC acknowledged the registrant’s insight and efforts to remediate but found that a formal warning was necessary to maintain standards and public confidence.