The following is part of the transcript of the proceedings at the GMC relating to David Southall on November 28th
It relates to when lawyers contemplating legal proceedings ask for information about patients.
The GMC's prosecuting Barrister (Mr Tyson) asks:
The problem heing that your agreement does not include those lawyers getting access to the SC files?
David Southall response:
My understanding is that it is very complicated, this, and it depends what was being asked for. If they
were asking for the recordings, then I provided them. If they were asking for the special case file,
having found out that we had it, then they were provided with it, or those bits of it that I could provide.
This implies a number of things:
a) That people were unlikely to know that special case files were kept
b) That unless people specifically asked for it in legal proceedings the contents were not provided and furthermore not all of them were provided.
This means that any case that David Southall was involved in now needs to be revisited to check what the situation is. If key information was withheld from the proceedings then that means that the case needs to be reopened. I will be writing to the authorities about this.
It also raises questions that the Information Commissioner needs to look at.
It relates to when lawyers contemplating legal proceedings ask for information about patients.
The GMC's prosecuting Barrister (Mr Tyson) asks:
The problem heing that your agreement does not include those lawyers getting access to the SC files?
David Southall response:
My understanding is that it is very complicated, this, and it depends what was being asked for. If they
were asking for the recordings, then I provided them. If they were asking for the special case file,
having found out that we had it, then they were provided with it, or those bits of it that I could provide.
This implies a number of things:
a) That people were unlikely to know that special case files were kept
b) That unless people specifically asked for it in legal proceedings the contents were not provided and furthermore not all of them were provided.
This means that any case that David Southall was involved in now needs to be revisited to check what the situation is. If key information was withheld from the proceedings then that means that the case needs to be reopened. I will be writing to the authorities about this.
It also raises questions that the Information Commissioner needs to look at.
Comments