Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Doctor who fought illegal practices faces bankruptcy: Rheumatologist must pay litigation costs in excess of pounds 60,000

Judy Jones,Health Services Correspondent
Tuesday 30 March 1993 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

A DOCTOR who helped to expose illegal restrictive practices in the UK's system of medical training and qualification faces bankruptcy after the High Court in London yesterday refused him damages and rulings against the Department of Health.

Dr Anthony Goldstein, a London rheumatologist, was landed with legal bills in excess of pounds 60,000, even though the court accepted his arguments that criteria for awarding specialist medical accreditation in the UK were in breach of EC law.

Mr Justice Schiemann said the Department of Health was 'in some embarrassment' over EC complaints last year that Britain had not complied with directives passed in 1975. These were intended to bring in mutual recognition of specialist medical qualifications between EC states.

The EC's complaint came to light after Dr Goldstein led an attack on the rules governing the appointment of NHS consultants and restrictions on those able to carry out private practice. A working party headed by Kenneth Calman, the Government's chief medical officer, accepted in January that Britain had unlawfully been running two systems in parallel. UK specialist accreditation, awarded by the medical Royal Colleges, was run in tandem with the EC specialist certification scheme.

But most doctors find they cannot be appointed consultants without accreditation. The High Court ruled in December 1991 that it was 'perverse' of the UK authorities to award Dr Goldstein the EC certificate but not accreditation, since each should imply completion of specialist training. Yesterday Mr Justice Schiemann acknowledged that Dr Goldstein's EC certificate was of no practical use to him. The judge also accepted that accreditation involved a 'fair amount of subjective assessment of the candidate by his seniors'.

He said that the intention of the EC directives was to enable those such as Dr Goldstein to practise as a specialist only in other EC member states, not in the UK where he trained. Under the Treaty of Rome different standards could be set by an EC state for its own nationals, so long as nationals from other states were not disadvantaged.

The judge referred to the case of an Italian surgeon, Uccio Querci della Rovere, who came to the UK in the late 1970s. Although fully qualified, Mr Querci had to start again at the bottom of the ladder because the authorities would not recognise his qualifications. Mr Justice Schiemann said foreign EC specialists such as Dr Querci 'can legitimately complain' that the UK has failed fully to implement the directives.

In other words, if Dr Goldstein had been a national of another EC state, coming to Britain to practise as a specialist, the judgment would have been more likely to have gone in his favour. But because he had trained and stayed in this country, he was bound by the prevailing UK system.

Dr Goldstein, who must pay the Department of Health's costs, said he would appeal.

(Photograph omitted)

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in